From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Freedman v. Freedman

Supreme Court of Ohio
Dec 15, 1948
83 N.E.2d 217 (Ohio 1948)

Opinion

No. 31586

Decided December 15, 1948.

Supreme Court — Dismissal — No debatable constitutional question involved — Deeds — Action by son, through mother as next friend, against husband's brothers — To enforce trust — Deeds by mother to such brothers as trustees for son — Deed without consideration by brothers as such trustees to family corporation — Quitclaim without consideration by corporation to one of brothers individually — Property described in deeds originally deeded to mother — By husband's parents, grandparents of son, through mesne conveyances — Claim no trust created — That various mesne deeds were to "dummy" corporation and "strawmen" — Who held bare legal title for grandparents — That a portion of the property was reserved by grandparents — And never originally conveyed — That such portion appeared in deeds to and from corporation — Parol evidence to show no trust, inadmissible, when — Deeds to and from corporation cancelled and trust declared valid — Inviolability of property — Section 19, Article I, Constitution — Due process — Section 16, Article I, Constitution — Article XIV, Amendments, U.S. Constitution.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga county.

Messrs. Gaines Hirsch, for appellee.

Messrs. Halle, Haber, Berick McNulty, for appellants.


It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.

Appeal dismissed.

WEYGANDT, C.J., MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, SOHNGEN and STEWART, JJ., concur.

TURNER, J., not participating.


Summaries of

Freedman v. Freedman

Supreme Court of Ohio
Dec 15, 1948
83 N.E.2d 217 (Ohio 1948)
Case details for

Freedman v. Freedman

Case Details

Full title:FREEDMAN, A MINOR, APPELLEE v. FREEDMAN ET AL., APPELLANTS

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Dec 15, 1948

Citations

83 N.E.2d 217 (Ohio 1948)
83 N.E.2d 217

Citing Cases

Viscomi v. Intershoe, Inc.

The purpose of this element in criminal cases is to indicate innocence, and in civil cases, to indicate the…

TRAY WRAP, INC. v. PACIFIC TOMATO GROWERS LTD.

Other cases hold that the special injury requirement means that the prior action resulted in a provisional…