Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Geauga Truck & Implement Co. v. Juskiewiczgreen2 sentences2026Geauga Truck & Implement Co. v. Juskiewicz, 9 Ohio St.3d 12, 14 (1984). 2019Geauga Truck & Implement Co. v. Juskiewicz, 9 Ohio St.3d 12, 14 , 457 N.E.2d 827 (1984). {¶6} In Sherman, this court applied Civ.R. 13(A) in affirming summary judgment in favor of a landlord on a tenant’s complaint for personal injury. | 1 | 2 |
Fifth Third Bank v. Hopkinsgreen2 sentences2014See also Fifth Third Bank v. Hopkins, 177 Ohio App.3d 114 , 2008-Ohio-2959, ¶ 10 (9th Dist.); SunTrust Bank v. Wagshul, 2d Dist. 2014See also Fifth Third Bank v. Hopkins, 177 Ohio App.3d 114 , 2008-Ohio-2959, ¶ 10 (9th Dist.); SunTrust Bank v. Wagshul, 2d Dist. | 1 | 1 |
Huntington National Bank v. Rossgreen1 sentence2014Bank v. Ross, 130 Ohio App.3d 687, 694 (10th Dist.1998), citing Civ.R. 13 (because mortgagee and mortgagor were co-defendants in a tax foreclosure action brought by the county treasurer, the compulsory counterclaim rule did not apply and mortgagee was not required to bring all of its foreclosure claims against the mortgagor in that action). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Grill v. Artistic Renovations
green
1 sentence2025The litigation in Grill v. Artistic Renovations, 2018-Ohio-747 (8th Dist.), arose out of a construction/remodeling contract. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Rettig Enterprises, Inc. v. Koehler
green
2 sentences2017Lignos , 1997 WL 67755 , at *1-2 (when the appellant's insurer brought an action for declaratory judgment to determine whether it had a duty to defend appellants, it was required to pursue as a compulsory counterclaim the request for reimbursement for attorney's fees in defending the declaratory judgment action). {¶ 39} The same analysis applies here and the second prong of the compulsory counterclaim test is satisfied, since the claim for attorney's fees arose directly out of the prior claim and "involve[d] many of the same factual issues, or the same factual and legal issues." (Citation omit 2017Lignos , 1997 WL 67755 , at *1-2 (when the appellant's insurer brought an action for declaratory judgment to determine whether it had a duty to defend appellants, it was required to pursue as a compulsory counterclaim the request for reimbursement for attorney's fees in defending the declaratory judgment action). {¶ 39} The same analysis applies here and the second prong of the compulsory counterclaim test is satisfied, since the claim for attorney's fees arose directly out of the prior claim and "involve[d] many of the same factual issues, or the same factual and legal issues." (Citation omit | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Gilbert v. Summit County
green
2 sentences2014Civ.R. 56(C); Gilbert v. Summit Cty., 104 Ohio St.3d 660 , 2004-Ohio-7108 , 821 N.E.2d 564, ¶ 6 . {¶6} In the instant case, the trial court granted summary judgment in Harper II, concluding that the legal malpractice claim was a compulsory counterclaim to the claim for unpaid legal fees, and that Harper was, therefore, required to litigate this claim in Harper I. 2014Civ.R. 56(C); Gilbert v. Summit Cty., 104 Ohio St.3d 660 , 2004-Ohio-7108 , 821 N.E.2d 564, ¶ 6 . {¶6} In the instant case, the trial court granted summary judgment in Harper II, concluding that the legal malpractice claim was a compulsory counterclaim to the claim for unpaid legal fees, and that Harper was, therefore, required to litigate this claim in Harper I. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Quintus v. McClure
green
1 sentence2007Wolff, Inc. (1984), 17 Ohio App.3d 173 ; Quintus v. McClure (1987), 41 Ohio App.3d 402 ; Broadway Mgt, Inc. v. Godale (1977), 55 Ohio App.2d 49 (stating that "[f]ailure to assert a compulsory counterclaim is a bar to any subsequent attempt to pursue same by application of the doctrine of res judicata"). {¶ 71} Section 5 (B), Article IV , of the Ohio Constitution provides in part: The Supreme Court shall prescribe rules governing practice and procedure in all courts of the state, which rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. * * * All laws in conflict with such rules | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Broadway Management, Inc. v. Godale
green
1 sentence2007Wolff, Inc. (1984), 17 Ohio App.3d 173 ; Quintus v. McClure (1987), 41 Ohio App.3d 402 ; Broadway Mgt, Inc. v. Godale (1977), 55 Ohio App.2d 49 (stating that "[f]ailure to assert a compulsory counterclaim is a bar to any subsequent attempt to pursue same by application of the doctrine of res judicata"). {¶ 71} Section 5 (B), Article IV , of the Ohio Constitution provides in part: The Supreme Court shall prescribe rules governing practice and procedure in all courts of the state, which rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. * * * All laws in conflict with such rules | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Interstate Steel Erectors, Inc. v. H. & L. Wolff, Inc.
green
1 sentence2007Wolff, Inc. (1984), 17 Ohio App.3d 173 ; Quintus v. McClure (1987), 41 Ohio App.3d 402 ; Broadway Mgt, Inc. v. Godale (1977), 55 Ohio App.2d 49 (stating that "[f]ailure to assert a compulsory counterclaim is a bar to any subsequent attempt to pursue same by application of the doctrine of res judicata"). {¶ 71} Section 5 (B), Article IV , of the Ohio Constitution provides in part: The Supreme Court shall prescribe rules governing practice and procedure in all courts of the state, which rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. * * * All laws in conflict with such rules | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Rockey v. 84 Lumber Co.
green
1 sentence2007Wolff, Inc. (1984), 17 Ohio App.3d 173 ; Quintus v. McClure (1987), 41 Ohio App.3d 402 ; Broadway Mgt, Inc. v. Godale (1977), 55 Ohio App.2d 49 (stating that "[f]ailure to assert a compulsory counterclaim is a bar to any subsequent attempt to pursue same by application of the doctrine of res judicata"). {¶ 71} Section 5 (B), Article IV , of the Ohio Constitution provides in part: The Supreme Court shall prescribe rules governing practice and procedure in all courts of the state, which rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. * * * All laws in conflict with such rules | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.
green
1 sentence2004Id. {¶ 14} We first consider appellant's second and third assignments of error, in which appellant contends that the trial court misapplied the compulsory counterclaim rule and thus erred in granting summary judgment to appellee. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Village of Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co.
green
1 sentence2004Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co. (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 102 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Jemo Associates, Inc. v. Garman
green
2 sentences1998Appellees cite Jemo Assoc., Inc. v. Garman (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 267 , 24 O.O.3d 358 , 436 N.E.2d 1353 , Sherman v. Pearson (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 70 , 673 N.E.2d 643 , and Maduka v. Parries, 14 Ohio App.3d 191 , 14 OBR 209, 470 N.E.2d 464 , for the proposition that Civ.R. 13(A) applies to forcible entry and detainer actions. 1998Appellees cite Jemo Assoc., Inc. v. Garman (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 267 , 24 O.O.3d 358 , 436 N.E.2d 1353 , Sherman v. Pearson (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 70 , 673 N.E.2d 643 , and Maduka v. Parries, 14 Ohio App.3d 191 , 14 OBR 209, 470 N.E.2d 464 , for the proposition that Civ.R. 13(A) applies to forcible entry and detainer actions. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Maduka v. Parries
green
2 sentences1998Appellees cite Jemo Assoc., Inc. v. Garman (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 267 , 24 O.O.3d 358 , 436 N.E.2d 1353 , Sherman v. Pearson (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 70 , 673 N.E.2d 643 , and Maduka v. Parries, 14 Ohio App.3d 191 , 14 OBR 209, 470 N.E.2d 464 , for the proposition that Civ.R. 13(A) applies to forcible entry and detainer actions. 1998Appellees cite Jemo Assoc., Inc. v. Garman (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 267 , 24 O.O.3d 358 , 436 N.E.2d 1353 , Sherman v. Pearson (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 70 , 673 N.E.2d 643 , and Maduka v. Parries, 14 Ohio App.3d 191 , 14 OBR 209, 470 N.E.2d 464 , for the proposition that Civ.R. 13(A) applies to forcible entry and detainer actions. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Sherman v. Pearson
green
2 sentences1998Appellees cite Jemo Assoc., Inc. v. Garman (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 267 , 24 O.O.3d 358 , 436 N.E.2d 1353 , Sherman v. Pearson (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 70 , 673 N.E.2d 643 , and Maduka v. Parries, 14 Ohio App.3d 191 , 14 OBR 209, 470 N.E.2d 464 , for the proposition that Civ.R. 13(A) applies to forcible entry and detainer actions. 1998Appellees cite Jemo Assoc., Inc. v. Garman (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 267 , 24 O.O.3d 358 , 436 N.E.2d 1353 , Sherman v. Pearson (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 70 , 673 N.E.2d 643 , and Maduka v. Parries, 14 Ohio App.3d 191 , 14 OBR 209, 470 N.E.2d 464 , for the proposition that Civ.R. 13(A) applies to forcible entry and detainer actions. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Osborn Co. v. Department of Administrative Services
green
2 sentences1996Osborn Co. v. Ohio Dept. of Adm. Serv. (1992), 80 Ohio App.3d 205 , 608 N.E.2d 1149 . 1996Osborn Co. v. Ohio Dept. of Adm. Serv. (1992), 80 Ohio App.3d 205 , 608 N.E.2d 1149 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.