Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

 If the promisor's main purpose in acting as a surety is to secure a benefit to himself, either personal or pecuniary, the promise to guarantee the debt of another is taken out of the statute.

The 'leading object' rule excuses the writing requirement of the statute of frauds and, in effect, makes an oral promise into an enforceable contract. The driving principle of the leading object rule is to prevent the use of the writing requirement to 'effectuate a wrong' 'which the statute's enactment was to prevent.' Wilson Floors v. Sciota Park, Ltd., 54 Ohio St.2d 451, 460, 377 N.E.2d 514 (1978).

The Ohio Supreme Court explains: 'When the leading object of the promisor is not to answer for another's debt but to subserve some pecuniary or business purpose of his own involving a benefit to himself, his promise is not within the statute of frauds, although the original debtor may remain liable.' Wilson Floors, supra, syllabus. In Ohio, when the rule began to emerge as a defense or excuse to the requirements of the statute of frauds, one test for the application of the rule was whether the promisor had become primarily or ...

Register or login to access full content