Case Name: SPYGLASS v. SPYGLASS
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1928
Citations: 6 Ohio Law Abs. 236
Docket Number: 
Parties: SPYGLASS v. SPYGLASS.
Judges: (Allread and Ferneding, JJ., concur.)
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 6
Pages: 236–238

Head Matter:
SPYGLASS v. SPYGLASS.
Ohio Appeals, 2nd Dist., Clark Co.
George W. Daniels and C. S. Olinger, Springfield, for plaintiff in error.
A. C. Link, Springfield, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
KUNKLE, J.
Where the plaintiff in an action for alimony alone brings suit in the county of her residence, the fact that the. plaintiff has not by any process brought the property of defendant located in the same county within the control of the court prevents the court from taking jurisdiction of the same.
(Allread and Ferneding, JJ., concur.)
For reference to full opinion, see Omnibus Index, last page, this issue.