
    No. 367
    REPUBLIC TOOL & MANUF. CO. v. LENARZ
    Ohio Court of Appeals, Cuyahoga County
    No. 4293.
    April 16, 1923
    This opinion has not been published except in Abstract.
    ATTACHMENTS — (1) Construction of work and labor under GC. 10253 — (2) Coroporate officer not within purview of statute.
    Middleton, J. J., Sayre and Mauck, JJ., 4th Dist. Sitting
    Error to Cleveland Municipal Court
    Judgment Reversed
    Attorneys — Stearns, Chamberlain & Royon, for Republic Co.; Grossman & Grossman, for Lenarz.
   SAYRE, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Elmer Lenarz brought suit against the Republic Tool & Mfg. Co. for salary due him on an oral contract of employment while he was acting as vice president and general manager of said company. Plaintiff performed po manual labor in the ordinary sense of such term, but was solely an executive of said company, and whatever work or labor he may be said to have performed jWas such work as executives are called upon to do. Sec.' 10253 GC. provides that an attachment may issue for work and labor. An affidavit was filed which states that a claim for work and labor existed, and certain moneys belonging to the defendant company were attached. A motion to discharge the attachment was made by the defendant, which was overruled. The defendant company prosecuted error, claiming that the service performed was not “work and labor” within the meaning of 10253 GC. In' reversing Judge Silbert of the Municipal Court, the Court of Appeals held:

1. The Legislature of Ohio, Under GC. 10253 did not intend to include within the term “work ard labor” claims of physicians, attorneys, or executive officers.

2. An executive officer of a corporation stands in the same relation to the business as the individual owner does and is an employer of those who work and labor rather than one who performs the same.

Attachment' discharged.  