Legal Opinion

First Bank v. Mascrete, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1997No. 96-907PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

The question presented in this case is whether a contempt hearing that results in a money judgment can be considered a trial for purposes of a Civ.R. 59 motion for a new trial. For the reasons that follow, we hold that it can, and we therefore reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.

App.R. 4(A) provides that a notice of appeal must be filed, generally, within thirty days of the judgment being appealed. App.R. 4(B)(2) provides that “[i]n a civil case or juvenile proceeding, if a party files a timely motion for * * * a new trial under Civ.R. 59(B), * * * the time for filing a notice of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. L.A. & D., Inc. v. Board of Lake County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. North Royalton Education Ass'n v. North Royalton Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1974
  3. In re the Arbitration between Ionian Shipping Co. & Tyson Shipping Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
  4. Brown v. CoffmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. O'Connor v. GraffOhio Court of Appeals · 1959

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Myers v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. First Bank of Marietta v. MascreteOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
  4. Doss v. ThomasOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
  5. In re Contemnor Caron, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division2000

16 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