Rogers v. Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region
This text of 893 N.E.2d 512 (Rogers v. Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region) 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
Certified Questions of State Law, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Nos. 06-4422 and 06-1423. On review of preliminary memoranda pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. XVIII(6). The court will answer the following questions:
1) Does R.C. 2919.123 mandate that physicians in Ohio who perform abortions using mifepristone do so in compliance with the forty-nine-day gestational limit described in the FDA approval letter?
2) Does R.C. 2919.123 mandate that physicians in Ohio who perform abortions using mifepristone do so in compliance with the treatment protocols and dosage indications described in the drug’s final printed labeling?
Motions for admission pro hac vice of Roger K. Evans and Helene K. Krasnoff by Jennifer L. Branch granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
893 N.E.2d 512, 119 Ohio St. 3d 1440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-planned-parenthood-cincinnati-region-ohio-2008.