Procter & Gamble Co. v. Stoneham

742 N.E.2d 657, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1454, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 757
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 21, 2001
Docket00-2046
StatusPublished

This text of 742 N.E.2d 657 (Procter & Gamble Co. v. Stoneham) 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
Procter & Gamble Co. v. Stoneham, 742 N.E.2d 657, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1454, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 757 (Ohio 2001).

Opinion

Hamilton App. No. C-990859. On motion to hold appeal in abeyance pending consummation of settlement. Motion granted.

Cook, J., dissents. Moyer, C. J., not participating.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
742 N.E.2d 657, 91 Ohio St. 3d 1454, 2001 Ohio LEXIS 757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/procter-gamble-co-v-stoneham-ohio-2001.