Legal Opinion

Krahn v. Kinney

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 24, 1989No. 88-386PublishedCited by 218 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.

Two issues are presented. The first is whether the underlying criminal conviction must be reversed before a cause of action can be stated in a legal malpractice action arising from the representation of a criminal defendant. The second is whether the denial of Krahn’s motion to vacate judgment operates as res judicata to bar a determination of the issues raised in this malpractice action. We answer both queries in the negative and affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

I

In this case we consider an issue of first impression for this court, to wit: what are the elements required to state a…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Norwood v. McDonaldOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Goodson v. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Whitehead v. General Telephone Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1969
  5. James W. McCord Jr. v. F. Lee BaileyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980

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

3Cited by218 opinions

  1. Grava v. Parkman TownshipOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Vahila v. HallOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Peeler v. Hughes & LuceTexas Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Grava v. Parkman Twp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Stevens v. BisphamOregon Supreme Court · 1993

213 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