Stewart v. Lake Cty. Historical Soc., Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Stewart v. Lake Cty. Historical Soc., Inc.

861 N.E.2d 143, 112 Ohio St. 3d 1469

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 7, 2007·No. 2006-2029·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Lake App. No. 2004-L-164, 2006-Ohio-4822. Discretionary appeal accepted on Proposition of Law Nos. I and III; cause held on Proposition of Law No. Ill only for the decision in 2006-0189, Uddin v. Embassy Suites Hotel, Franklin App. No. 04AP-754, 2005-0hio-6613; and briefing schedule stayed as to Proposition of Law No. III.

Moyer, C.J., Stratton and Cupp, JJ., would also accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. II. O’Donnell, J., would accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. Ill only. Pfeifer and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.

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

Lake App. No. 2004-L-164, 2006-Ohio-4822. Discretionary appeal accepted on Proposition of Law Nos. I and III; cause held on Proposition of Law No. Ill only for the decision in 2006-0189, Uddin v. Embassy Suites Hotel, Franklin App. No. 04AP-754, 2005-0hio-6613; and briefing schedule stayed as to Proposition of Law No. III.

Moyer, C.J., Stratton and Cupp, JJ., would also accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. II. O’Donnell, J., would accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. Ill only. Pfeifer and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.

Stewart v. Lake Cty. Historical Soc., Inc., 861 N.E.2d 143, 112 Ohio St. 3d 1469 (Ohio 2007).

Pincite

861 N.E.2d 143 (Stewart v. Lake Cty. Historical Soc., Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related