Haynes v. Franklin
This text of 744 N.E.2d 774 (Haynes v. Franklin) 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.
Opinion
Warren App. No. CA2000-03-025. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ Entry Granting In Part Motion to Certify Conflict filed November 13, 2000, at page 2:
“[WJhether an edge drop on the berm of a county or city road, in and of itself, constitutes a nuisance within the meaning of R.C. 2744.02(B)(3).”
Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 00-2004, Haynes v. Franklin, Warren App. No. CA2000-03025.
The conflict case is Thompson v. Muskingum Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (Nov. 12, 1998), Muskingum App. No. CT98-0010, unreported, 1998 WL 817826.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
744 N.E.2d 774, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1477, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 1308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haynes-v-franklin-ohio-2001.