elastic standard in Ohio

2014When market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, sometimes called the standard of value to the owner.’” Id., citing Bishop, supra, at 546 .

2010However, “[w]hen market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, sometimes called the standard of value to the owner.” Bishop v. East Ohio Gas Co. (1944), 143 Ohio St. 541, 546 , 28 O.O. 470, 472 , 56 N.E.2d 164, 166 .

2023This doctrine is a recognition that property may have value to the owner in exceptional circumstances which is the basis of a better standard than what the article would bring in the open market.” Id. “[W]here the property converted by the defendant * * * consists of articles for personal use, which have been used by the owner, and therefore have little or no market value, the measure of damages is the reasonable value to the owner at the time of conversion.” Erie RR. at paragraph three of the syllabus. {¶56} Contrary to Mrs. Wiser’s assertion, the Holmans’ opinion of value was not based “sole

2019Morrow No. 2010-CA-0006, 2011-Ohio-1200 , ¶ 21 quoting Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Youngstown (2002), 151 Ohio App.3d 16 , 31–32, 783 N.E.2d 523 , citing F. Enterprises, Inc. v. Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. (1976), 47 Ohio St.2d 154, 159 , 351 N.E.2d 121 . {¶64} “ ‘When market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, some-times called the standard of value to the owners.’ “ Richmond v. Gerard, 10th Dist.

2019Morrow No. 2010-CA-0006, 2011-Ohio-1200 , ¶ 21 quoting Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Youngstown (2002), 151 Ohio App.3d 16 , 31–32, 783 N.E.2d 523 , citing F. Enterprises, Inc. v. Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. (1976), 47 Ohio St.2d 154, 159 , 351 N.E.2d 121 . {¶64} “ ‘When market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, some-times called the standard of value to the owners.’ “ Richmond v. Gerard, 10th Dist.

2019Morrow No. 2010-CA-0006, 2011-Ohio-1200 , ¶ 21 quoting Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Youngstown (2002), 151 Ohio App.3d 16 , 31–32, 783 N.E.2d 523 , citing F. Enterprises, Inc. v. Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. (1976), 47 Ohio St.2d 154, 159 , 351 N.E.2d 121 . {¶64} “ ‘When market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, some-times called the standard of value to the owners.’ “ Richmond v. Gerard, 10th Dist.

2019Morrow No. 2010-CA-0006, 2011-Ohio-1200 , ¶ 21 quoting Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Youngstown (2002), 151 Ohio App.3d 16 , 31–32, 783 N.E.2d 523 , citing F. Enterprises, Inc. v. Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. (1976), 47 Ohio St.2d 154, 159 , 351 N.E.2d 121 . {¶64} “ ‘When market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, some-times called the standard of value to the owners.’ “ Richmond v. Gerard, 10th Dist.

2019Morrow No. 2010-CA-0006, 2011-Ohio-1200 , ¶ 21 quoting Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Youngstown (2002), 151 Ohio App.3d 16 , 31–32, 783 N.E.2d 523 , citing F. Enterprises, Inc. v. Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. (1976), 47 Ohio St.2d 154, 159 , 351 N.E.2d 121 . {¶64} “ ‘When market value cannot be feasibly obtained, a more elastic standard is resorted to, some-times called the standard of value to the owners.’ “ Richmond v. Gerard, 10th Dist.