Wiles v. Medina Auto Parts

777 N.E.2d 846, 97 Ohio St. 3d 1427
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wiles v. Medina Auto Parts. Read the opinion of the Court — 96 Ohio St. 3d 240
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided October 29, 2002·No. 2001-1303·Published

Opinion

Medina App. No. 3131-M. Reported at 96 Ohio St.3d 240, 2002-Ohio-3994, 773 N.E.2d 526. This cause came on for further consideration upon appellant’s motion for reconsideration and the motion for reconsideration of amici curiae Ohio Employment Lawyers Association, Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers, et al. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that appellant’s motion for reconsideration be, and hereby is, denied.

Douglas, Resnick and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the motion for reconsideration of amici curiae be, and hereby is, granted.

Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.

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

Wiles v. Medina Auto Parts, 777 N.E.2d 846, 97 Ohio St. 3d 1427 (Ohio 2002).

777 N.E.2d 846 (Wiles v. Medina Auto Parts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wiles v. Medina Auto Parts
96 Ohio St. 3d 240 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2002)
Wiles v. Medina Auto Parts
2002 Ohio 3994 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2002)