Artisan Mechanical, Inc. v. Beiser

942 N.E.2d 383, 128 Ohio St. 3d 1410
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 2, 2011·No. 2011-0052·Published

Opinion

Butler App. No. CA2010-02-039, 2010-Ohio-5427. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated at page 2 of the court of appeals’ Entry filed December 14, 2010:

“When there is a factual dispute between the parties over the existence of a valid settlement agreement, is the trial court required to conduct an evidentiary hearing regardless of whether it enforces or denies enforcement of the agreement and enters judgment pursuant to the Ohio Supreme Court decision in Rulli v. Fan Co., 79 Ohio St.3d 374?”

The conflict cases are Michelle M.S. v. Eduardo H.T., Erie App. No. E-05-053, 2006-Ohio-2119, and Moore v. Johnson (Dec. 11,1997), Franklin App. No. 96APE11-1579.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Artisan Mechanical, Inc. v. Beiser, 942 N.E.2d 383, 128 Ohio St. 3d 1410 (Ohio 2011).

942 N.E.2d 383 (Artisan Mechanical, Inc. v. Beiser) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Michelle v. Eduardo, Unpublished Decision (4-28-2006)
2006 Ohio 2119 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2006)
Rulli v. Fan Co.
683 N.E.2d 337 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)