Legal Opinion

Glickman v. Coakley

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 26, 1984No. 47997PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff-buyer paid defendant-sellers for an option to purchase their shares in a federally insured bank and thereby give plaintiff-buyer a controlling interest. Believing that the government later barred the sale, the buyer sought the return of his option payment by invoking "termination" provisions in the option agreement. At the close of the evidence in a jury trial, the trial court directed a verdict for defendant-sellers. The court ruled that the buyer could not exercise his contractual "termination" right and recover his payment unless the Federal Reserve Board expressly disapproved…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Federal Communications Commission v. SchreiberSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. West Los Angeles Institute for Cancer Research v. Ward MayerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
  3. Cities Service Oil Co. v. National Shawmut BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1961
  4. International Telephone & Telegraph v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1972
  5. Security Sewage Equipment Co. v. McFerrenOhio Supreme Court · 1968

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McCabe/Marra Co. v. City of DoverOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Allied-General Nuclear ServicesDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1990
  3. Broad Street Energy Co. v. Endeavor Ohio, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2013
  4. Mt. Pleasant Blacktopping Co., Inc. v. Inverness Group, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API