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.
7 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2016 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Knopp v. Dayton Machine Tool Co., Unpublished Decision (12-8-2004)green1 sentence2015Columbiana No. 03 CO 60 , 2004-Ohio-6817, ¶ 19 (“resolution of the issue of proximate cause in this case involves the doctrine of implied assumption of risk”); Bumgardner v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2d Dist. | 1 | 1 |
Westray v. Imperial Pools & Supplies, Inc.green2 sentences2009See Westray v. Imperial Pools & Supplies (1999), 133 Ohio App.3d 426, 432 , 728 N.E.2d 431 . 2009See Westray v. Imperial Pools & Supplies (1999), 133 Ohio App.3d 426, 432 , 728 N.E.2d 431 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gallagher v. Cleveland Browns Football Co.
green
2 sentences2016In that case, the doctrine of implied assumption of risk, not primary assumption of risk, would be applicable.” Gallagher v. Cleveland Browns Football Co., 74 Ohio St.3d 427, 432 , 1996-Ohio-320 , 659 N.E.2d 1232 . {¶27} Kreps argues that since the club's customs are to use a cart, anyone playing a round of golf there is aware of the ordinary risks of using a cart. 2016In that case, the doctrine of implied assumption of risk, not primary assumption of risk, would be applicable.” Gallagher v. Cleveland Browns Football Co., 74 Ohio St.3d 427, 432 , 1996-Ohio-320 , 659 N.E.2d 1232 . {¶27} Kreps argues that since the club's customs are to use a cart, anyone playing a round of golf there is aware of the ordinary risks of using a cart. | 6 | 2006–2016 |
Gallagher v. Cleveland Browns Football Co.
green
1 sentence2016In that case, the doctrine of implied assumption of risk, not primary assumption of risk, would be applicable.” Gallagher v. Cleveland Browns Football Co., 74 Ohio St.3d 427, 432 , 1996-Ohio-320 , 659 N.E.2d 1232 . {¶27} Kreps argues that since the club's customs are to use a cart, anyone playing a round of golf there is aware of the ordinary risks of using a cart. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Pope v. Willey, Unpublished Decision (9-12-2005)
green
1 sentence2008No. CA2004-10-077, 2005-Ohio-4744 , 2005 WL 2179317 , at ¶ 11. {¶ 12} Here, the trial court determined that “ ‘tubing’ is a recreational activity” and that the evidence showed that Aber’s injury resulted from “conduct that itself was a foreseeable, customary part of ‘tubing.’ ” Based on this finding, the trial court determined that the primary-assumption-of-the-risk doctrine applied. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Cincinnati Base Ball Club Co. v. Eno
green
2 sentences2008In that case, the doctrine of implied assumption of risk, not primary assumption of *389 risk, would be applicable.” (Emphasis added.) Gallagher, 74 Ohio St.3d at 432 , 659 N.E.2d 1232 (discussing Cincinnati Baseball Club Co. v. Eno (1925), 112 Ohio St. 175 , 147 N.E. 86 ). {¶ 11} “ ‘The types of risks associated with the activity are those that are foreseeable and customary risks of the * * * recreational activity.’ ” Lykins, supra, at ¶ 34 , quoting Pope v. Willey, 12th Dist. 2008In that case, the doctrine of implied assumption of risk, not primary assumption of *389 risk, would be applicable.” (Emphasis added.) Gallagher, 74 Ohio St.3d at 432 , 659 N.E.2d 1232 (discussing Cincinnati Baseball Club Co. v. Eno (1925), 112 Ohio St. 175 , 147 N.E. 86 ). {¶ 11} “ ‘The types of risks associated with the activity are those that are foreseeable and customary risks of the * * * recreational activity.’ ” Lykins, supra, at ¶ 34 , quoting Pope v. Willey, 12th Dist. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.