Columbus Bar Ass'n v. King

Ohio Supreme Court

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. King

761 N.E.2d 1053, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1443, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 269

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 25, 2002

Docket98-423

StatusPublished

This text of 761 N.E.2d 1053 (Columbus Bar Ass'n v. King) 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

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. King, 761 N.E.2d 1053, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1443, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 269 (Ohio 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

On January 10, 2002, respondent filed a motion for elimination or reduction of time and for clarification of the issues presented at oral argument on January 8, 2002. It is determined by the court that respondent’s motion consists of arguments on the merits of the case. Whereas S.Ct.Prac.R. IX(9) prohibits the filing of additional materials relating to the merits of the case after the case has been [1444]*1444orally argued,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that respondent’s motion be, and hereby is, stricken.

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

On January 10, 2002, respondent filed a motion for elimination or reduction of time and for clarification of the issues presented at oral argument on January 8, 2002. It is determined by the court that respondent’s motion consists of arguments on the merits of the case. Whereas S.Ct.Prac.R. IX(9) prohibits the filing of additional materials relating to the merits of the case after the case has been [1444]*1444orally argued,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that respondent’s motion be, and hereby is, stricken.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

761 N.E.2d 1053, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1443, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/columbus-bar-assn-v-king-ohio-2002.