Benesch v. Action Software, Inc., 91708 (4-2-2009)

{¶ 32} I respectfully dissent in part from the majority's disposition of this appeal. I would sustain Benesch's second and third assignments of error.

{¶ 33} Counsel in the case sub judice "assumed" that the trial court or plaintiff's counsel would conduct a conference call and, thus, did not believe that it was necessary to file an appeal pursuant to Loc. R. 29. This assumption, and counsel's consequent inaction, amounts to just the type of "inaction" described in Kay v. Marc Glassman, Inc.,76 Ohio St.3d 18, 1996-Ohio-430.

{¶ 34} In Kay, the Supreme Court, despite stating that the term…