Mast v. Doctor's Hosp. North, 350 N.E.2d 429 (Ohio 1976). · Go Syfert
Search
Mast v. Doctor's Hosp. North, 350 N.E.2d 429 (Ohio 1976). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 2015–2024 · …app.r. 12(d), in conjunction with civ.r. 42(b), authorizes a court of appeals to order the retrial of only those issues, claims or defenses the original trial of which resulted in prejudicial error, and to allow issues tried free from error to stand. at p. 541 ✓
80 citation events (39 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982 2004 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Mundy v. Centrome, Inc.
Ohio Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
N., 46 Ohio St.2d 539, 541 (1976); State Farm Fire & Cas.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Fisher v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med. Ctr.
Ohio Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
N., 46 Ohio St.2d 539, 541 (1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Aretz v. Rue
Ohio Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium
North (1976), 46 Ohio St.2d 539, 541-542 , 75 O.O.2d 556, 557-558 , 350 N.E.2d 429, 430 (authorizing a court of appeals in its discretion to order the retrial of only those issues, claims or defenses which resulted in prejudicial error, and to allow issues tried free from error to stand).
cited Cited "see" Catalanotto v. Byrd
Ohio Ct. App. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mast at 541-542, 350 N.E.2d 429 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mast
v.
Doctor's Hospital North
No. 76-56.
Ohio Supreme Court.
Jun 30, 1976.
350 N.E.2d 429
Messrs. Volkema, Pees & Snevel and Mr. Randall W. Pees, for appellant., Messrs. Lane, Alton <fc Horst, Mr. Collis Gundy Lane, Mr. Jack R. Alton and Mr. Charles J. Chastang, for appellee.
Brow, Brown, Celebrezze, Corrigan, Herbert, Neill, Stern.
Cited by 29 opinions  |  Published

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

Before the advent of the Ohio Buies of Civil and Appellate Procedure the case law of this state clearly held that the reversal and vacation of an erroneous verdict for damages required á trial de novo as to all issues in the ease. See Edelstein v. Kidwell (1942), 139 Ohio St. 595; Markota v. East Ohio Gas Co. (1951), 154 Ohio St. 546.

It is the opinion of a majority of this court, however, that App. B. 12 (D), in conjunction with Civ. B. 42(B), authorizes a Court of Appeals to order the retrial of only those issues, claims or defenses the original trial of which resulted in prejudicial error, and to allow issues tried free from error to stand.

App. B. 12(D) vests the court with the necessary authority to order a trial court to exercise its powers under Civ. B. 42(B) to separately try any claim or issue, when such separation is “in furtherance of convenience or to[*542] avoid prejudice, oí when separate trials will be conducive to expedition and economy.”' Civ. R. 42(B)..

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons,- the certified question is answered in the affirmative, and the cause is remanded to the Court, of Appeals with instructions to remand the cause to the Court of Common Pleas for a re-, trial upon only the issue of damages.

Judgment accordingly.

O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Corrigan, Celebrezze, W.. Brow^ and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

Concurrence

Stern, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree that the cause be remanded. However, I am of the opinion that, in remanding the cause, it should be retried on all issues, on the basis of Markota v. East Ohio Gas Co. (1951), 154 Ohio St. 546, and Edelstein v. Kidwell (1942), 139 Ohio St. 595.