Legal Opinion

Cecil & Geiser, L.L.P. v. Plymale

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 25, 2011No. Nos. 11AP-167 and 11AP-182PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tyack, Judge.

{¶ 1} Plaintiff, Cecil & Geiser, L.L.P., appeals the decision of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. Defendants, Ronald E. Plymale and the law firm Plymale & Dingus, L.L.C., also appeal the decision of the trial court. For the following reasons, we remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.

{¶ 2} Cecil & Geiser, L.L.P., formerly Plymale Partnership, L.L.P. (“Cecil & Geiser”), assign the following errors:

I. The Trial Court bifurcated Count Four of the Amended Complaint for hearing but then erred when it dismissed the remaining counts after the December…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State v. AdamsOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Tokles & Son, Inc. v. Midwestern Indemnity Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Koos v. Central Ohio Cellular, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hill v. MarshallOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  2. Smith v. Wyandot Mem'l Hosp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2018
  3. AIM 360, L.L.C. v. HemlebenOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
  4. In re Estate of McCauleyOhio Court of Appeals · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API