Williams v. 312 Walnut L.P.

Ohio Supreme Court

Williams v. 312 Walnut L.P.

676 N.E.2d 902, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1433, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3720

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 20, 1997

Docket97-227

StatusPublished

This text of 676 N.E.2d 902 (Williams v. 312 Walnut L.P.) 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

Williams v. 312 Walnut L.P., 676 N.E.2d 902, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1433, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3720 (Ohio 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Hamilton App. No. C-960368. This cause is pending as a discretionary appeal and a claimed appeal of right from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County. On March 7, 1997, appellee city of Cincinnati filed a document titled “Motion to Determine Deadline.” The court finds that appellee’s motion is, in substance, a request to file an untimely memorandum in response and, as such, is prohibited by S.CtPrac.R. XIV(IXC). Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that appellee’s motion to determine deadline be, and hereby is, stricken.

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

Hamilton App. No. C-960368. This cause is pending as a discretionary appeal and a claimed appeal of right from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County. On March 7, 1997, appellee city of Cincinnati filed a document titled “Motion to Determine Deadline.” The court finds that appellee’s motion is, in substance, a request to file an untimely memorandum in response and, as such, is prohibited by S.CtPrac.R. XIV(IXC). Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that appellee’s motion to determine deadline be, and hereby is, stricken.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

676 N.E.2d 902, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1433, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-312-walnut-lp-ohio-1997.