History
  • No items yet
midpage
State ex rel. Ashcraft v. Ashcraft
1930 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1087
Ohio Ct. App.
1930
Check Treatment
BY THE COURT

It is argued in this court that inasmuch as the Probate Court gave the custody of the child to its father there was no power in that court to provide for the infant visiting its maternal grandparents. The question argued, however, is not before us. That question could only be raised by the father. The father is not complaining of, and so far as the court is advised is satisfied with, the judgment. In fact, he was not a party to that proceeding and would not seem to be bound by that judgment. That case only involved the respective rights of the two sets of grandparents and as between them it can not, in the absence of a bill of exceptions, be said to be erroneous.

The judgment of the Common Pleas is reversed and the judgment of the Probate Court is affirmed.

Middleton, PJ, Mauck and Blosser, JJ, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: State ex rel. Ashcraft v. Ashcraft
Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals
Date Published: Mar 25, 1930
Citation: 1930 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1087
Court Abbreviation: Ohio Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.