Legal Opinion

Jim's Steak House, Inc. v. City of Cleveland

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1998No. 96-1211PublishedCited by 86 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

While res judicata was the bone of contention between the parties in the court of appeals, we instead find for Jim’s for the reason that the city never filed an answer to Jim’s amended complaint, and therefore waived its opportunity even to raise res judicata as an affirmative defense.

This case is determined by the rules of pleading. Civ.R. 8(B) states that a defendant “shall state in short and plain terms the party’s defenses to each claim asserted and shall admit or deny the averments upon which the adverse party relies.” In this case, an amended complaint is at issue, but Civ.R. 15(A)…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hoover v. SumlinOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. State ex rel. Freeman v. MorrisOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. State ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996

3Cited by86 opinions

  1. Landskroner v. LandskronerOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. State ex rel. Bey v. Bur. of Sentence Computation (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2022
  3. State ex rel. Deiter v. McGuireOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Chuang Dev. L.L.C. v. RainaOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Kraft Construction Co. v. Cuyahoga County Board of CommissionersOhio Court of Appeals · 1998

81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API