Legal Opinion

Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1977No. 76-411PublishedCited by 67 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,.

Civ. R. 54(B) provides, in pertinent part, that “ [w]hen more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may enter final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay.”

In Whitaker-Merrell v. Geupel Co. (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 184, 280 N. E. 2d 922, the syllabus states:

“A trial court is authorized to grant final summary judgment upon the whole case, as to fewer…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. MacKeySupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  2. Whitaker-Merrell Co. v. Carl M. Geupel Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State ex rel. Jacobs v. Municipal CourtOhio Supreme Court · 1972

3Cited by67 opinions

  1. General Accident Insurance v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Noble v. ColwellOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Chef Italiano Corp. v. Kent State Univ.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Harkai v. Scherba Industries, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. Wise v. GurskyOhio Supreme Court · 1981

62 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