Sherman v. River Oaks Office Plaza, Ltd.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHarper, Judge
I concur with the majority’s disposition of the first assignment of error and would go further and enter judgment for appellee as I do not see any reason to remand the cause for further proceedings. I, however, dissent from the disposition of the second assignment of error as I perceive the majority’s reasoning to be inconsistent with its finding on the first assignment. I cannot reconcile finding on one hand that appellee’s refusal to follow the requirement of the law was material and on the other hand requiring that appellant separately prove knowingly and intentionally.
The statute provides…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Einhorn v. Ford Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
- Brooks v. Hurst Buick-Pontiac-Olds-Gmc, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1985
- Bronaugh v. R. & E. Dredging Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1968
- Martin v. SteubnerDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1979
- United Bank & Trust Co. v. JoynerArizona Supreme Court · 1932
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.