Case Name: Edwin W. Howard v. E. T. Kinney Company
Court: Knox County Circuit Court
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1906-10-12
Citations: 8 Ohio C.C. (N.S.) 568
Docket Number: 
Parties: Edwin W. Howard v. E. T. Kinney Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: Ohio Circuit Court Reports (new series)
Volume: 8
Pages: 568–568

Head Matter:
INJUNCTION AGAINST LEVY ON JUDGMENT.
[Circuit Court of Knox County.]
Edwin W. Howard v. E. T. Kinney Company.
Decided, October 12, 1906.
Cognovit Note—Judgment upon, in Defendant’s Absence—Pleading— Injunction Against Levy of Execution•—Jurisdiction.
Tn the absence of a showing of lack of jurisdiction to enter the judgment complained of, injunction will not lie to prevent the levy of execution on a foreign judgment.
Hugh Neal and L. B. Ilouck, for plaintiff in error.
F. V. Owen, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
By The Court.
In this case the petition shows that judgment was rendered against the plaintiff in the Common Pleas Court of Fulton county on a cognovit note. The allegation that he did not have opportunity to appear and make a defense is not important, because the averment that it was rendered on a cognovit, implies that his appearance was there entered under the terms of that cognovit, and that being true he was in court to all intents and purposes, and if he has a defense to that action, that is the court in which he must make application for relief. It is only where a judgment is void for want of jurisdiction that an injunction will lie to restrain a levy of an execution issued upon that judgment. Finding and decree for defendant; petition of plaintiff dismissed at the costs of plaintiff. Remanded for execution. Motion for new trial overruled and exceptions noted.