Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Nevins v. Ohio Department of Transportation

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 22, 1998No. Nos. 98AP-141, 98AP-180 and 98AP-281Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPeggy Bryant, Judge

Being unable to agree with all of the majority opinion, I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part.

A. Plaintiffs’ Assignments of Error on Cross-Appeal in the ODOT Case

The first assignment of error in plaintiffs’ cross-appeal asserts that the trial court erred in failing to consolidate the damages the jury awarded against Concrete Construction Company (“Concrete”) in case No. 98AP-180 with the damages the trial court awarded against the Ohio Department of Transportation (“ODOT”) in case No. 98AP-141. In support of their argument, plaintiffs insist that the jury’s $1.65 million award…

2Cases cited31 opinions

Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
Goldfuss v. DavidsonOhio Supreme Court · 1997
State v. WolonsOhio Supreme Court · 1989
Horton v. Harwick Chemical Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
Schade v. Carnegie Body Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982

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