Esber Beverage Co. v. Canandaigua Wine Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Esber Beverage Co. v. Canandaigua Wine Co.

1994 Ohio 48, 68 Ohio St. 3d 463

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 22, 1994

Docket1993-0086

StatusPublished

This text of 1994 Ohio 48 (Esber Beverage Co. v. Canandaigua Wine 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

Esber Beverage Co. v. Canandaigua Wine Co., 1994 Ohio 48, 68 Ohio St. 3d 463 (Ohio 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 68 Ohio St.3d 463.]

ESBER BEVERAGE COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. CANANDAIGUA WINE COMPANY, INC. APPELLEE. [Cite as Esber Beverage Co. v. Canandaigua Wine Co., 1994-Ohio-48.] Commercial transactions—Alcoholic beverages franchise not created by operation of law pursuant to R.C. 1333.83 through the mere existence of a written contract between a manufacturer and distributor of such products, where the contract disclaims any intention to create such a relationship and the contract term is for less than six months. (No. 93-86—Submitted January 25, 1994—Decided March 23, 1994.) CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. CA-8974. __________________ Comstock, Springer & Wilson and Marshall D. Buck, for appellant. Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, John W. Edwards II, Kathleen B. Burke and John M. Majoras, for appellee. __________________ The cause is affirmed on authority of Tri County Distrib., Inc. v. Canandaigua Wine Co. (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 123, 623 N.E.2d 1206. MOYER, C.J., A.W. SWEENEY, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 68 Ohio St.3d 463.]

ESBER BEVERAGE COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. CANANDAIGUA WINE COMPANY, INC. APPELLEE. [Cite as Esber Beverage Co. v. Canandaigua Wine Co., 1994-Ohio-48.] Commercial transactions—Alcoholic beverages franchise not created by operation of law pursuant to R.C. 1333.83 through the mere existence of a written contract between a manufacturer and distributor of such products, where the contract disclaims any intention to create such a relationship and the contract term is for less than six months. (No. 93-86—Submitted January 25, 1994—Decided March 23, 1994.) CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. CA-8974. __________________ Comstock, Springer & Wilson and Marshall D. Buck, for appellant. Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, John W. Edwards II, Kathleen B. Burke and John M. Majoras, for appellee. __________________ The cause is affirmed on authority of Tri County Distrib., Inc. v. Canandaigua Wine Co. (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 123, 623 N.E.2d 1206. MOYER, C.J., A.W. SWEENEY, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1994 Ohio 48, 68 Ohio St. 3d 463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/esber-beverage-co-v-canandaigua-wine-co-ohio-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack