L.A. & D., Inc. v. Board of Lake County Commissioners
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
I
Appellant’s first two propositions of law will be consolidated for discussion, wherein appellant claims the Court of Appeals erred by refusing to grant its motion for leave to amend the notice of appeal to include errors of the trial court in granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment.
We find no merit in this assertion.
Appellant argues that, upon the strength of the liberality of amending, the motion for leave to amend its notice of appeal should have been allowed. In effect, appellant asks for an extension of time to amend its notice of appeal from a final judgment, to wit: the summary…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Whitehead v. General Telephone Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1969
- Morris v. First National Bank & Trust Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1968
- Shearson, Hayden & Stone, Inc. v. SteinerOhio Court of Appeals · 1979
3Cited by23 opinions
- Bobko v. SagenOhio Court of Appeals · 1989
- First Bank v. Mascrete, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
- Knecht v. Ohio Department of RehabilitationOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- Demianczuk v. DemianczukOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
- Amare v. Chellena Food Express, Inc., 08ap-678 (1-15-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.