Opinion · Ohio Supreme Court
Sergeant v. Steinberger
2 Ohio 305
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Ohio Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Ohio
- Date
- 1826-12-15
- Topic
- general
By the Court : It has more than once been decided, by the Supreme Court, on the circuit, that estates in joint tenancy do not exist under the laws of Ohio. The reasons which gave rise to this description of estate in England, never existed with us. The jus accreseendi is not founded in principles of natural justice, nor in any reasons of policy applicable to our society or institutions. But, on the contrary, it is adverse to the understandings, habits, and feelings of the people. We have no statute recognizing the existence of any such principle as the right of suvivorship.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Sergeant v. Steinberger. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 11 opinions
It has more than once been decided, by the Supreme Court, on the circuit, that estates in joint tenancy do not exist under the laws of Ohio. The reasons which gave rise to this description of estate in England, never existed with us. The jus accreseendi is not founded in principles of natural justice, nor in any reasons of policy applicable to our society or institutions. But, on the contrary, it is adverse to the understandings, habits, and feelings of the people.
We have no statute recognizing the existence of any such principle as the right of suvivorship. But we have various statutory provisions inconsistent with it. The laws passed, both during the territorial government and since, authorize joint tenants, tenants in common, and coparceners, and, in some cases, the executors, administrators, or guardians of such persons, to demand and have partition. It is from this evident that the legislature have treated a joint tenancy as a tenancy in common.
The decree of the court of common pleas is reversed, and the cause sent back to be further proceeded in.†
Note by the Editob. — No joint tenancy in Ohio, x. 1.