Legal Opinion

Sciko v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 16, 1992No. 63443PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ann McManamon, Judge.

This appeal challenges the purported dismissal of a negligence action on a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion as well as the failure to join an indispensable party pursuant to Civ.R. 19.

Robert and Gloria Seiko filed a complaint against the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (“CEI”) on November 7, 1991 after an allision between Robert Seiko’s powerboat and a CEI breakwall located in Eastlake. The action also named three other parties, who were later dismissed by the plaintiffs.

In their first cause of action, the Scikos claimed CEI was negligent in not providing proper lighting on…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Wing v. Anchor Media, Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Agricultural Ins. v. ConstantineOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  4. State ex rel. Baran v. FuerstOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Layne v. HuffmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1974

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hersh v. GrumerOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
  2. Soliel Tans, L.L.C. v. Timber Bentley Coe, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019
  3. Heltzel v. VerikakisOhio Court of Appeals · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API