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.
11 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State ex rel. Yost v. Crossridge, Inc.
green
1 sentence2024Yost v. Crossridge, Inc., 2024-Ohio-5144 .] For the reasons stated in the Opinion rendered herein, the assignment of error and the cross-assignments of error are sustained. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Thomas v. Chimera
green
1 sentence2023Thomas, 2021-Ohio-4204, ¶ 42 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Kaplysh v. Takieddine
green
1 sentence2020App.R. 3(C)(1) provides, in part, that "[a] person who intends to defend a judgment or order against an appeal taken by an appellant and who also seeks to change the judgment or order * * * shall file a notice of cross appeal within the time allowed by App.R. 4." App.R. 4(A)(1) provides that "a party who wishes to appeal from an order that is final upon its entry shall file the notice of appeal * * * within 30 days of that entry." If a notice of appeal "is timely filed by a party, another party may file a notice of appeal within the appeal time period otherwise prescribed by this rule or withi | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Voleck v. Tennant
neutral
1 sentence2019D’Apolito, J., concurs. [Cite as Voleck v. Tennant, 2019-Ohio-4230 .] For the reasons stated in the Opinion rendered herein, the Tennants’ cross-assignments of error are overruled. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Ohio Turnpike Commission v. Ellis
neutral
1 sentence2016Harrison, M.D. to testify that Plaintiff- Appellant’s nerve injury was an unavoidable and acceptable complication of the surgical position she was placed in during the February 22, 2013 surgery.” {¶15} Dr. Rashid raises the following cross-assignments of error: {¶16} “[1.] The trial court abused its discretion in not excluding the proximate cause opinions of plaintiff-appellant’s expert, Ann A. Little, M.D.” {¶17} “[2.] The trial court abused its discretion in not excluding the proximate cause opinions of plaintiff-appellant’s expert, William P. Irvin, M.D.” {¶18} “The qualification or compete | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Holiday Haven Members Assn. v. Paulson
green
1 sentence2014JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. [Cite as Holiday Haven Members Assn. v. Paulson, 2014-Ohio-3902 .] JUDGMENT ENTRY It is ordered the judgment be affirmed and that all parties split the costs herein taxed. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Dolan v. Glouster
green
1 sentence2014JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. [Cite as Dolan v. Glouster, 2014-Ohio-2017 .] JUDGMENT ENTRY It is ordered that the judgment be affirmed and that the parties herein equally divide all costs herein taxed. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Bechtol v. Bechtol
green
2 sentences2006Bechtol v. Bechtol (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 21 , 550 N.E.2d 178 , syllabus. 2006Bechtol v. Bechtol (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 21 , 550 N.E.2d 178 , syllabus. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Nakoff v. Fairview General Hospital
green
2 sentences2004Hosp. (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 254 , 256 , 662 N.E.2d 1 ; also see Bragg v. Hatfield, Vinton App. No. 02CA567, 2003-Ohio-1441 , ¶ 22. {¶ 16} With these principles in mind, we turn our attention to the merits of the assignments of error and the cross-assignments of error. 2004Hosp. (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 254 , 256 , 662 N.E.2d 1 ; also see Bragg v. Hatfield, Vinton App. No. 02CA567, 2003-Ohio-1441 , ¶ 22. {¶ 16} With these principles in mind, we turn our attention to the merits of the assignments of error and the cross-assignments of error. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Duracote Corp. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
green
1 sentence2002Duracote Corp. v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co. (1983), 2 Ohio St.3d 160 , 163 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Linko v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America
yellow
1 sentence2002Co. of North America (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 445 , applies retroactively." {¶ 36} Although a party who has not filed a notice of appeal may raise cross-assignments of error pursuant to R.C. 2505.22 , 2 the cross-assignments of error may only be used to prevent the reversal of the judgment under review. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc.
green
2 sentences1994Huffman v. Hair Surgeons, Inc. (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d 83 ,19 OBR 123, 482 N.E.2d 1248 . 1994Huffman v. Hair Surgeons, Inc. (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d 83 ,19 OBR 123, 482 N.E.2d 1248 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.