Legal Opinion

King v. Williams

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1983No. 82-1151PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliam B. Brown, J.

The issue presented in this case is whether the driver of an emergency medical services vehicle operated by the city of Akron, and the city itself, qualify for immunity from liability under R.C. 701.02. Because this court finds that the defendants-appellees’ actions fall within the protection of the aforementioned statute the granting of summary judgment in their favor was appropriate.

Initially, it should be noted that the court of appeals affirmed the grant of the motion for summary judgment on the basis that the city was protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. See Wooster v. Arbenz…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Haverlack v. Portage Homes, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. City of Wooster v. ArbenzOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Dougherty v. TorrenceOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Hall v. City of YoungstownOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Nanna v. Village of McArthurOhio Court of Appeals · 1974

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Applewhite v. Accuhealth, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2013
  2. Enghauser Manufacturing Co. v. Eriksson Engineering Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Wanzer v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Zents v. Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Riffle v. Physicians & Surgeons Ambulance Service, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2013

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API