Case ID: ohio-law-abs_37/html/0025-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

KRATZ v LIEN et
    Ohio Appeals, 9th Dist., Summit Co.
    No. 3337.
    Decided Oct. 1, 1940.
    Ferbstein & Sicherman, Akron, for appellant.
    Thomas J. Herbert, Atty. Gen., Columbus, and Ross R. Ormsby, Special Counsel, Akron, for appel3ee Rodney P. Lien, Supt. of Banks, etc.
    Buckingham, Doolittle & Thomas, Akron, for appellee The Sumner Property Co.
    Foust & Holden, Akron, for appellee O. J. Shong.
    Edw. N. Heiser, Akron, for appellee Ray A. Norman, d.b.a. Norman Realty Co.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Examination of the evidence adduced herein, convinces the members of this court that the real estate sought to be sold is being sold by The Sumner Property Co., a distinct corporate entity, and not by the superintendent of banks of Ohio.

Compliance with the provisions of §710-95 GC, is not required of private corporations.

The prayer of the petition of the plaintiff (appellant) is denied, and the petition dismissed, at appellant’s costs.

WASHBURN, PJ., DOYLE, J., & STEVENS, J., concur.