Hammonds v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
CONNELL, Chief Judge.
The plaintiff has filed complaint against the defendant for allegedly inducing the interruption of a physician-patient relationship and for allegedly inducing the divulgence of confidential information gained through that relationship. The case is here by reason of diversity of citizenship, the defendant being a Connecticut corporation, with its principal place of business in Connecticut. As such, the case must be governed by substantive principles of Ohio law. The defendant has now brought this motion to dismiss the complaint, asserting that the pleading fails to allege…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Berry v. MoenchUtah Supreme Court · 1958
- Smith v. DriscollWashington Supreme Court · 1917
- Simonsen v. SwensonNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
- White v. Cincinnati, Richmond & Muncie RailroadIndiana Court of Appeals · 1904
- Shuster v. North American Mortgage Loan Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1942
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Hammonds v. Aetna Casualty & Surety CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1965
- Horne v. PattonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1973
- Stempler v. SpeidellSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
- Biddle v. Warren General HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Anker v. BrodnitzNew York Supreme Court · 1979
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.