State ex rel. Aloi v. Klide

619 N.E.2d 691, 67 Ohio St. 3d 442
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided October 13, 1993·No. No. 93-695·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are aware of no procedural rule that authorizes a court to dismiss a complaint summarily on a question of law. See State ex rel. Hanson v. Guernsey Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 545, 605 N.E.2d 378. Nevertheless, upon review of the arguments and exhibits submitted in this court, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

We note that while some issues in the underlying action in appellee’s court have been decided, an action for damages remains. Therefore, appellee may yet rule on the appellant’s motions, and, if he fails to do so, any legal injury appellant suffers may be addressed on appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

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

State ex rel. Aloi v. Klide, 619 N.E.2d 691, 67 Ohio St. 3d 442 (Ohio 1993).

619 N.E.2d 691 (State ex rel. Aloi v. Klide) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related