Legal Opinion

Pakulski v. Garber

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 24, 1983No. 82-1223PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

The basis for appellant’s claim is that he was induced by *255fraud to extend a loan to the Garber-Lawrence Publishing Group, Inc. and that such fraud was perpetrated by Ronald J. McCracken, a member of the law firm of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick. Appellant asserts that he should be able to recover damages which flow from this alleged fraud even though Mc-Cracken was never directly involved with Duane Pheil’s proposal that prompted appellant’s extension of credit. McCracken was involved in the negotiations which resulted in the drafting of the releases which the appellant signed, releasing certain…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Beck v. CianchettiOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Whitt v. HutchisonOhio Supreme Court · 1975

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. McKissick v. YuenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
  2. Hansen v. Ford Motor Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Moore v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
  4. Luther v. DannerSupreme Court of Kansas · 2000
  5. Lucarell v. NationwideOhio Court of Appeals · 2015

6 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