Legal Opinion

Giancola v. Azem (Slip Opinion)

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 2018No. 2016-1584PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKennedy, J.

*595 {¶ 1} In this discretionary appeal from a judgment of the Eighth District Court of Appeals, we consider the limitations of the law-of-the-case doctrine. The law-of-the-case doctrine provides that legal questions resolved by a reviewing court in a prior appeal remain the law of that case for any subsequent proceedings at both the trial and appellate levels. Nolan v. Nolan , 11 Ohio St.3d 1 , 3, 462 N.E.2d 410 (1984). The decision of the appellate court in the first appeal in this case was limited to whether Nicholas Giancola's mother had apparent authority to sign an arbitration agreement on…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Quern v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Sprague v. Ticonic National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  3. Nolan v. NolanOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Arnott v. ArnottOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  5. State ex rel. Potain v. MathewsOhio Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Farmers State Bank v. Sponaugle (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  2. Browne v. Artex Oil Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  3. State ex rel. Ames v. Portage Cty. Bd. of Commrs.Ohio Supreme Court · 2023
  4. Anderson v. WBNS-TV, Inc. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  5. State ex rel. Bowling v. DeWineOhio Court of Appeals · 2021

51 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