Maestle v. Best Buy Co.

778 N.E.2d 1050, 97 Ohio St. 3d 1459
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 20, 2002·No. 2002-1674·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Cuyahoga App. No. 79827, 2002-Ohio-3769. 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’ Journal Entry filed September 24, 2002:

“Should R.C. 2711.02 and R.C. 2711.03 be read in pari materia and require the court to conduct a hearing to determine whether the parties here entered into a valid and enforceable arbitration agreement or are these distinct statutes as determined in Brumm v. McDonald & Co. Securities, Inc. (1992), 78 Ohio App.3d 96 [603 N.E.2d 1141], holding that R.C. 2711.02 does not require the court to conduct such a hearing?”

Resnick and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent.

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

Maestle v. Best Buy Co., 778 N.E.2d 1050, 97 Ohio St. 3d 1459 (Ohio 2002).

778 N.E.2d 1050 (Maestle v. Best Buy Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related