Legal Opinion

Border City Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Moan

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1984No. 84-296PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant essentially argues that, under the liberal pleading standards of the Rules of Civil Procedure, appellant’s complaint should be read as stating a cause of action against appellees for malicious prosecution. Appellees argue that appellant’s failure to allege that the actions filed against appellant were instituted maliciously, without probable cause, and were terminated in appellant’s favor is fatal to appellant’s complaint and warrants dismissal thereof.

*66In Scholler v. Scholler (1984), 10 Ohio St. 3d 98, this court stated in paragraph one of the syllabus:

“An attorney is immune from…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. O'Brien v. University Community Tenants Union, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Scholler v. SchollerOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Dickerhoof v. City of CantonOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Royce v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1981

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Mussivand v. DavidOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State ex rel. Bush v. SpurlockOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Trussell v. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Flaherty v. WeinbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  5. ISHA, Inc. v. RisserOhio Court of Appeals · 2013

34 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