Case Name: HARVIE et v. GOODALE et
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1928-01-23
Citations: 6 Ohio Law Abs. 198
Docket Number: No. 3105
Parties: HARVIE et v. GOODALE et.
Judges: (Hamilton, PJ., and Mills, J., concur.)
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 6
Pages: 198–198

Head Matter:
HARVIE et v. GOODALE et.
Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist., Hamilton Co.
No. 3105.
Decided Jan. 23, 1928.
W. B. Mente and Lyons & Bradford, Cincinnati, fox Harvie et.
Waifip, Schindel í Ba'yless; Bferbelrt H. Shaffer and James H. Cleveland, Cincinnati, for Goodale et.

Opinion:
PULL TEXT.
CUSHING, J.
This action was filed in the Court of Common Pleas to contest a will.
There were more than thirty defendants named in the petition, and about twenty-five of them were served; others weie not served.
The Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. Error is prosecuted to reverse that judgment.
Section 12,082 of the General Code of Ohio requires that the issue must be made up, if not by the pleadings, by an entry of the court. This question was discussed in the case of Perrine v. Perrine, et al, 18 Ohio App. 467, and, on authority of that case, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Ohio, will be reversed, and the cause remanded with instructions that the Court reinstate the case, make up the issue, bring in all the parties, and submit the question to a juiy.
(Hamilton, PJ., and Mills, J., concur.)