Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2721.14 (2026)

Interpretation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The provisions of this chapter shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate their general purpose to make the law of this state uniform with the law of those states that enact similar provisions and to harmonize, insofar as possible, with federal laws and regulations on the subject of declaratory judgments and decrees.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1994–1994 · leading case: Broz v. Winland, 629 N.E.2d 395 (Ohio 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Broz v. Winland, 629 N.E.2d 395 (Ohio 1994). “” II After hearing the plaintiffs’ evidence, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defense, ruling as a matter of law that Melissa had been without a reasonable belief that she was entitled to use the car.”
Broz v. Winland`, 68 Ohio St. 3d 521 (Ohio 1994). “" II {¶ 26} After hearing the plaintiffs' evidence, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defense, ruling as a matter of law that Melissa had been without a 7 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO reasonable belief that she was entitled to use the car.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.