DocketNumber: No 828
Citation Numbers: 7 Ohio Law. Abs. 164
Judges: Allread, Ferneding, Kunkle
Filed Date: 10/2/1928
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/20/2022
The commissioners proceeded upon the theory that the Hi-Pointe Investment
The Board of Commissioners acted upon the legal title and had no notice of an equitable title in the plaintiffs, besides there were publications of notice of the improvement, and it would not be unreasonable to hold that the parties having an equitable interest should be chargeable with a notice so published. Even if these equitable owners were not actually made parties they were bound to take notice of any order affecting the property in which they had an equitable interest and would be bound to take such steps as the statue provides to protect their interests, and if they failed to do so, they would be barred.
The answer of the Commissioners filed in this case denies that there was any assessment made against the plaintiff, and this averment must, under the record, be taken as. true. Consequently the plaintiff would only be granted relief, if at all. under the contract as between her and that company.
It therefore follows that the judgment of tiffs court must be in favor of the defendants.