Burya v. Lake Metroparks Board of Park Commissioners

867 N.E.2d 829, 114 Ohio St. 3d 35
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 20, 2007·No. Nos. 2006-2078 and 2006-2094·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The certified question is answered in the negative, and the judgment of the court of appeals holding that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to appellant is reversed on the authority of Elston v. Howland Local [36] Schools, 113 Ohio St.3d 314, 2007-Ohio-2070, 865 N.E.2d 845. The judgment of the trial court granting appellant’s motion for summary judgment is reinstated.

Rosplock & Perez, Richard J. Perez, and Jesse M. Schmidt, for appellees. Law Offices of Steven K. Kelley and Cornelius J. O’Sullivan, for appellant. Moyer, C.J., Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger and Cupp, JJ., concur. Pfeifer, J., dissents and would answer the certified question in the affirmative and affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

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

Burya v. Lake Metroparks Board of Park Commissioners, 867 N.E.2d 829, 114 Ohio St. 3d 35 (Ohio 2007).

867 N.E.2d 829 (Burya v. Lake Metroparks Board of Park Commissioners) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Monteith v. Delta Pro, 3-07-35 (4-28-2008)
2008 Ohio 1997 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2008)