Gottesman v. Estate of Gottesman

Ohio Supreme Court

Gottesman v. Estate of Gottesman

101 Ohio St. 3d 60

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 14, 2004

DocketNo. 2002-2187

StatusPublished

This text of 101 Ohio St. 3d 60 (Gottesman v. Estate of Gottesman) 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

Gottesman v. Estate of Gottesman, 101 Ohio St. 3d 60 (Ohio 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

{¶ 1} The appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur. F.E. Sweeney, J., dissents and would reverse. Pfeifer, J., dissents and would affirm the court of appeals. Walter & Haverfield, L.L.P., Robert S. Horbaly and Darrell A. Clay, for appellee Ralph E. Cascarilla, executor of the estate of Robert G. Gottesman.

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

{¶ 1} The appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur. F.E. Sweeney, J., dissents and would reverse. Pfeifer, J., dissents and would affirm the court of appeals. Walter & Haverfield, L.L.P., Robert S. Horbaly and Darrell A. Clay, for appellee Ralph E. Cascarilla, executor of the estate of Robert G. Gottesman.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 Ohio St. 3d 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gottesman-v-estate-of-gottesman-ohio-2004.