Tenney v. General Electric Co.

887 N.E.2d 349, 118 Ohio St. 3d 197
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 14, 2008·No. No. 2007-1490·Published

Opinion

{¶ 1} The part of the judgment of the court of appeals that reversed the judgment of the trial court is reversed on the authority of Doe v. First United Methodist Church (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 531, 629 N.E.2d 402, and Love v. Port [198] Clinton (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 98, 524 N.E.2d 166. The judgment of the trial court is reinstated.

Thomas A. Sobecki, for appellant. Baker & Hostetler, L.L.P., Gregory V. Mersol, Kelly M. King, and Gil Brosky, for appellees. Moyer, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Pfeifer, J., dissents and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

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

Tenney v. General Electric Co., 887 N.E.2d 349, 118 Ohio St. 3d 197 (Ohio 2008).

887 N.E.2d 349 (Tenney v. General Electric Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Love v. City of Port Clinton
524 N.E.2d 166 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1988)
Doe v. First United Methodist Church
629 N.E.2d 402 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1994)