Case Name: KRATZ v. LIEN et
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1940-10-01
Citations: 37 Ohio L. Abs. 25
Docket Number: No. 3337
Parties: KRATZ v LIEN et
Judges: WASHBURN, PJ., DOYLE, J., & STEVENS, J., concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 37
Pages: 25–26

Head Matter:
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 appel 3ee 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:
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.