Legal Opinion
Hogue v. Navistar Internatl. Truck Engine, 2006 Ca 85 (9-14-2007)
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided September 14, 2007No. 2006 CA 85PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
{¶ 1} Gary Hogue appeals from judgments of the Clark County Court of Common Pleas, which dismissed his complaint for employer intentional tort, pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6), and denied his motion for relief from judgment (titled a "request for reconsideration"), pursuant to Civ.R. 60(B). For the following reasons, the judgments of the trial court will be affirmed.
{¶ 2} According to Hogue's complaint, on February 6, 1998, an electric cart owned and maintained by his employer, Navistar International Truck and Engine Corporation ("Navistar"), malfunctioned and struck him. Hogue suffered…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- GTE Automatic Electric, Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1976
- O'Brien v. University Community Tenants Union, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1975
- Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- Rose Chevrolet, Inc. v. AdamsOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Griffey v. RajanOhio Supreme Court · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- McClure v. Alexander, 2007 Ca 98 (3-21-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- Estate of Wright v. Tusky Coal, L.L.C., 2007 Ap 06 0033 (1-8-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009