Legal Opinion
Cosgrove v. Williamsburg of Cincinnati Mgt. Co., Inc.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided September 21, 1994No. 1992-2549PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 70 Ohio St.3d 281.] COSGROVE, APPELLANT, V. WILLIAMSBURG OF CINCINNATI MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC., D.B.A. EVERGREEN RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, APPELLEE. [Cite as Cosgrove v. Williamsburg of Cincinnati Mgt. Co., Inc.,
1994-Ohio-295.] Employer and employee—Sex discrimination—R.C. 4112.99 is a remedial statute and is subject to R.C. 2305.07's six-year limitations period. R.C. 4112.99 is a remedial statute, and is thus subject to R.C. 2305.07's six-year statute of limitations. (No. 92-2549—Submitted December 15, 1993—Decided September 21,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. MisselSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Huntington v. AttrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Helmick v. Cincinnati Word Processing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
- Richard L. Smith and Deborah L. Smith v. No. 2 Galesburg Crown Finance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980
- Denis J. Murphy, Trustee v. Household Finance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Wilson v. Durrani (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
- Meyer v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2009
- Jackson v. International FiberOhio Court of Appeals · 2006
- Browne v. Artex Oil Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
- Hampel v. Food Ingredients Specialties, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2000
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.