Solitaria v. Stallard

Ohio Supreme Court

Solitaria v. Stallard

554 N.E.2d 1329, 51 Ohio St. 3d 130, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 240

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMay 30, 1990

DocketNo. 89-277

StatusPublished

This text of 554 N.E.2d 1329 (Solitaria v. Stallard) 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

Solitaria v. Stallard, 554 N.E.2d 1329, 51 Ohio St. 3d 130, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 240 (Ohio 1990).

Pincite

Opinions

The cause in case No. 89-277 came before this court upon the certification of the court of appeals that its judgment on the issue of comparative negligence conflicted with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Erie County in Carney v. McAfee (Dec. 31, 1986), Erie App. No. E-85-58, unreported, reversed on other grounds (1988), 35 Ohio St. 3d 52, 517 N.E. 2d 1374; the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Trumbull County in Onderko v. Richmond Mfg. Co. (July 28, 1986), Trumbull App. No. 3472, unreported (companion case [Trumbull App. No. 3474] reversed on other grounds [1987], 31 Ohio St. 3d 296, 31 OBR 576, 511 N.E. 2d 388); and the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Butler County in Bowling v. Jake Sweeney Chevrolet, Inc. (Mar. 31, 1986), Butler App. No. CA84-05-054, unreported, reversed on other grounds sub nom. Bowling v. Heil Co. (1987), 31 Ohio St. 3d 277, 31 OBR 559, 511 N.E. 2d 373.

The court of appeals also certified the cause on the basis that its judgment on the issue of Civ. R. 54(C) conflicted with the judgments of the Court [131]*131of Appeals for Montgomery County in Ulrich v. Pumroy (July 25, 1988), Montgomery App. No. CA 10694, unreported, and Weaver v. Weaver (Apr. 10, 1985), Montgomery App. No. CA 8975, unreported; and the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Summit County in Douthitt v. Garrison (1981), 3 Ohio App. 3d 254, 3 OBR 286, 444 N.E. 2d 1068.

After oral argument this court in 49 Ohio St. 3d 710, 551 N.E. 2d 1303, ordered that additional briefs be filed bn specific issues.

Upon consideration of this cause, this court orders, sua sponte, that the appeal be dismissed as having been improperly certified because we see no conflict. State v. Parobek (1990), 49 Ohio St. 3d 61, 550 N.E. 2d 476, and cases cited therein.

Sweeney, Douglas, Weight and Resnick, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and H. Brown, J., dissent. Holmes, J., not participating.

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

The cause in case No. 89-277 came before this court upon the certification of the court of appeals that its judgment on the issue of comparative negligence conflicted with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Erie County in Carney v. McAfee (Dec. 31, 1986), Erie App. No. E-85-58, unreported, reversed on other grounds (1988), 35 Ohio St. 3d 52, 517 N.E. 2d 1374; the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Trumbull County in Onderko v. Richmond Mfg. Co. (July 28, 1986), Trumbull App. No. 3472, unreported (companion case [Trumbull App. No. 3474] reversed on other grounds [1987], 31 Ohio St. 3d 296, 31 OBR 576, 511 N.E. 2d 388); and the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Butler County in Bowling v. Jake Sweeney Chevrolet, Inc. (Mar. 31, 1986), Butler App. No. CA84-05-054, unreported, reversed on other grounds sub nom. Bowling v. Heil Co. (1987), 31 Ohio St. 3d 277, 31 OBR 559, 511 N.E. 2d 373.

The court of appeals also certified the cause on the basis that its judgment on the issue of Civ. R. 54(C) conflicted with the judgments of the Court [131]*131of Appeals for Montgomery County in Ulrich v. Pumroy (July 25, 1988), Montgomery App. No. CA 10694, unreported, and Weaver v. Weaver (Apr. 10, 1985), Montgomery App. No. CA 8975, unreported; and the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Summit County in Douthitt v. Garrison (1981), 3 Ohio App. 3d 254, 3 OBR 286, 444 N.E. 2d 1068.

After oral argument this court in 49 Ohio St. 3d 710, 551 N.E. 2d 1303, ordered that additional briefs be filed bn specific issues.

Upon consideration of this cause, this court orders, sua sponte, that the appeal be dismissed as having been improperly certified because we see no conflict. State v. Parobek (1990), 49 Ohio St. 3d 61, 550 N.E. 2d 476, and cases cited therein.

Sweeney, Douglas, Weight and Resnick, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and H. Brown, J., dissent. Holmes, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

554 N.E.2d 1329, 51 Ohio St. 3d 130, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solitaria-v-stallard-ohio-1990.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack