
    STATE ex SPIRES v. ALLREAD et.
    Ohio Supreme Court.
    No. 20636.
    Decided Dec. 21, 1927.
    In Prohibition.
    Writ denied.
    Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
    681. JURISDICTION — Right against property in custodia legis must be worked out through court which has custody and control.
    Matthew L. Bigger, Columbus, for plaintiff.
    Edward C. Turner, attorney general, and C. S. Younger, Columbus, for defendants.
   BY THE COURT.

The writ of prohibition prayed for in this case against the members of the Court of Appeals of Franklin county, Ohio, and William C. Safford, superintendent of insurance of the state of Ohio, is denied upon the authority of Hirsch v. Conn, 115 Ohio St., 87, and for the further reason that the property in which relator seeks to reach an interest in order -to satisfy a claim against one of the policyholders in the Great American Insurance Company is in custodia legis, and whatever rights, if any, relator may establish in the property and assets of the insurance bompany may be worked out, and, under well established equitable principles, can only be worked out through the court which has custody and control of said' property, and, further, has the right to make distribution thereof.

(Marshall, CJ., Day, Allen and Kinkade, JJ., concur. Jones, J., concurs in the judgment.)  