Case Name: NORWOOD v. O'BRIEN, Admr.
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1939-12-18
Citations: 30 Ohio Law Abs. 652
Docket Number: No. 5663
Parties: NORWOOD v O’BRIEN, Admr.
Judges: HAMILTON, PJ., MATTHEWS & ROSS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 30
Pages: 652–652

Head Matter:
NORWOOD v O’BRIEN, Admr.
Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Hamilton Co.
No. 5663.
Decided Dec. 18, 1939.
Robert A. Black, Cincinnati, for appellant.
Hightower & O’Brien, Cincinnati, for appellees.

Opinion:
OPINION
BY THE COURT:
Heard on appeal' on law and fact.. Plaintiff seeks to engraft a resulting trust on a deed absolute, by parol evidence.
The law is that a resulting trust maybe proved by parol evidence, but the proof must be clear, certain, and convincing. Harvey v Gardiner, 41 Oh St. 642; Mannix v Purcell, et, 46 Oh St 102; Russell, et v Bruer, et 64 Oh St 1; Boughman v Boughman, 69 Oh St 273.
The evidence in this case fails to meet the requirements under the rule,, and a decree for the dfendants, appellees here, dismissing appellant's petition, at his costs, will be entered.
HAMILTON, PJ., MATTHEWS & ROSS, JJ., concur.