Case ID: ohio-law-abs_16/html/0543-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By ROSS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MIAMI PRESS CO v WHITAKER PAPER CO
    Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Hamilton Co '
    No 4499.
    Decided Nov 20, 1933
    Brink, Marckworth, Conney & Hennegan, Cincinnati, for plaintiff in error.
    Oliver D. Roemler, for defendant in error.
   OPINION

By ROSS, J.

In the original petition it is alleged:

“That by reason of the depressed business conditions this defendant did enter into an agreement with this plaintiff and two other creditors whereby defendant was to pay a minimum of $250.00 per month on its indebtedness, said amount to be prorated on the claims of the three creditors; defendant further agreed that if it failed to make said payment by the fifth day of any month it would turn over its assets to a representative of the three creditors for the purpose of a liquidation of its business for the benefit of all creditors; that defendant has failed to make the minimum payments and has failed to turn over its assets to a representative of the three creditors as agreed.”

The prayer of the petition was however simply for judgment and the appointment of a receiver. No equitable relief was sought.

An amended petition has been since filed and specific performance of the contract prayed. It would appear therefore that under §11894, GC, the defendant in error is now entitled to a receiver. Hoiles v Watldns et, 117 Oh St, 165.

The order appointing the receiver will not be disturbed.

HAMILTON, PJ, and CUSHING, J, concur.