DiCenzo v. A-Best Prods. Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

DiCenzo v. A-Best Prods. Co.

878 N.E.2d 33, 116 Ohio St. 3d 1455

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 26, 2007

Docket2007-1628

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 878 N.E.2d 33 (DiCenzo v. A-Best Prods. Co.) 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

DiCenzo v. A-Best Prods. Co., 878 N.E.2d 33, 116 Ohio St. 3d 1455 (Ohio 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Cuyahoga App. No. 88583, 2007-0hio-3270. Discretionary appeal accepted on Proposition of Law No. II.

Lundberg Stratton and Cupp, JJ., would also accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. I. Pfeifer, J., dissents.

Motion for admission pro hac vice of Joni M. Mangino by Bruce P. Mandel granted.

Motions for admission pro hac vice of Mark A. Behrens and Cary Silverman by Victor E. Schwartz granted.

Motions for admission pro hac vice of Diana Nickerson Jacobs, Mark C. Meyer, David B. Rodes, and Jason T. Shipp by Joseph J. Cirilano granted.

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