Fogle v. Village of Bentleyville

878 N.E.2d 638, 116 Ohio St. 3d 301
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided December 13, 2007·No. No. 2007-1433·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted.

{¶ 2} The judgment of the courts of appeals is reversed on the authority of Hubbell v. Xenia, 115 Ohio St.3d 77, 2007-Ohio-4839, 873 N.E.2d 878, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals with instructions for the court of appeals to conduct a de novo review of the law and facts. If, after that review, only questions of law remain, the court of appeals may resolve the appeal. If genuine issues of material fact remain, the court of appeals may remand the cause to the trial court for further development of the facts necessary to resolve the immunity issue.

Moyer, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Pfeifer, J., dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Hubbell v. Xenia. O’Donnell, J., dissents.

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

Fogle v. Village of Bentleyville, 878 N.E.2d 638, 116 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2007).

878 N.E.2d 638 (Fogle v. Village of Bentleyville) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Knox v. Hetrick, 91102 (3-26-2009)
2009 Ohio 1359 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2009)