Howard v. Cunard Line Ltd.

524 N.E.2d 175, 37 Ohio St. 3d 134, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 178
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJune 8, 1988
DocketNo. 88-192
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 524 N.E.2d 175 (Howard v. Cunard Line Ltd.) 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
Howard v. Cunard Line Ltd., 524 N.E.2d 175, 37 Ohio St. 3d 134, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 178 (Ohio 1988).

Opinion

The motion to certify the record is allowed. The judgment of the court of appeals dismissing appellant’s appeal as untimely filed is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals for consideration of the merits of the appeal, on authority of Atkinson v. Grumman Ohio Corp. (1988), 37 Ohio St. 3d 80, 523 N.E. 2d 851.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Nichols v. Sidney Motors
573 N.E.2d 701 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
524 N.E.2d 175, 37 Ohio St. 3d 134, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-cunard-line-ltd-ohio-1988.