Barth v. Barth

Ohio Supreme Court

Barth v. Barth

852 N.E.2d 1211, 110 Ohio St. 3d 1462

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided August 23, 2006·No. 2006-0896·Published

Opinion

Cuyahoga App. No. 86473, 2006-0hio-1094. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ Journal Entry filed April 11, 2006:

“Whether the sixth-month residency requirement for jurisdiction set forth in R.C. 3105.03 is a strict test or may a court examine one party’s intent and the other party’s fraudulent inducement in abandoning Ohio as then' domicile.”

Moyer, C.J., Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.

The conflict cases are McMaken v. McMaken (1994), 96 Ohio App.3d 402, and Heath v. Heath (Mar. 7, 1997), Lucas App. No. L-96-288.

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

Cuyahoga App. No. 86473, 2006-0hio-1094. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ Journal Entry filed April 11, 2006:

“Whether the sixth-month residency requirement for jurisdiction set forth in R.C. 3105.03 is a strict test or may a court examine one party’s intent and the other party’s fraudulent inducement in abandoning Ohio as then' domicile.”

Moyer, C.J., Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.

The conflict cases are McMaken v. McMaken (1994), 96 Ohio App.3d 402, and Heath v. Heath (Mar. 7, 1997), Lucas App. No. L-96-288.

Barth v. Barth, 852 N.E.2d 1211, 110 Ohio St. 3d 1462 (Ohio 2006).

Pincite

852 N.E.2d 1211 (Barth v. Barth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related