Cincinnati v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.
740 N.E.2d 1111, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1411, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 85
This text of 740 N.E.2d 1111 (Cincinnati v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Cincinnati v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 740 N.E.2d 1111, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1411, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 85 (Ohio 2001).
Opinion
Hamilton App. Nos. C-990729, C-990814 and C-990815. On discretionary appeal. Appeal allowed.
On motion for admission pro hoc vice of James P. Dorr and Sarah L. Olson by Robert A. McMahon.
Motion granted.
On motion for admission pro hac vice of Harold Mayberry and Lawrence Greenwald et al. by Robert A. McMahon. Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Sturm, Ruger & Co. v. City of Atlanta
560 S.E.2d 525 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2002)
Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.
28 P.3d 116 (California Supreme Court, 2001)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
740 N.E.2d 1111, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1411, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cincinnati-v-beretta-usa-corp-ohio-2001.