Legal Opinion
Delman v. City of Cleveland Heights
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 2, 1989No. 87-1934PublishedCited by 174 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.
The parties have stipulated that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the city was negligent in conducting the point-of-sale inspections. Therefore, the issue we must resolve is whether the city and its employees owe a duty to the Delmans to act reasonably when conducting and reporting point-of-sale inspections. Pursuant to our recent decision in Sawicki v. Ottawa Hills (1988), 37 Ohio St. 3d 222, 525 N.E. 2d 468, we hold that the city does not owe such a duty.
A public official’s statutory duty does not give rise to a private duty unless a special duty or relationship to the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Haddon View Investment Co. v. CoopersOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Dinsky v. Town of FraminghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Cracraft v. City of St. Louis ParkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Sawicki v. Village of Ottawa HillsOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Modlin v. City of Miami BeachSupreme Court of Florida · 1967
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by174 opinions
- Peggy Greenberg and Pamela Rossmann, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated v. The Life Insurance Company of VirginiaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc. v. Franklin County Convention Facilities AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Textron Financial Corp. v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
- Wallace v. Ohio Dept. of CommerceOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- Commerce & Industry Insurance v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 1989
169 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.