Office v. Office
This text of 677 N.E.2d 811 (Office v. Office) 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
Montgomery App. No. 15298. This cause is pending before the court as a discretionary appeal and cross-appeal and claimed appeal of right. It appears from the records of this court that appellee/cross-appellant has not filed a combined memorandum in support of the cross-appeal and in response to appellant/cross-appellee’s memorandum in support of jurisdiction, due April 2, 1997, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court, and therefore has failed to prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the cross-appeal of Lynn E. Office be, and hereby is, dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
677 N.E.2d 811, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1450, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-v-office-ohio-1997.