Legal Opinion
Haller v. Borror Corp.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 21, 1990No. 88-2020PublishedCited by 139 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGrady, J.
In this case we are presented with two issues: whether in an action to set aside a settlement agreement for fraud a plaintiff is required to first tender to a defendant the consideration he received in settlement, and whether an allegation that one has been wrongfully induced by another to commit a crime states an actionable claim for damages.
I
Fraud in the Factum
A release of a cause of action for damages is ordinarily an absolute bar to a later action on any claim encompassed within the release. Perry v. M. O’Neil & Co. (1908), 78 Ohio St. 200, 85 N.E. 41. To avoid that bar, the releasor must…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Dice v. Akron, Canton & Youngstown RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Texaco, Inc. v. Pennzoil, Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1987
- Juhasz v. Quik Shops, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1977
- Williams v. Marion Rapid Transit, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1949
- Gibler v. TrimbleOhio Supreme Court · 1846
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by139 opinions
- ABM Farms, Inc. v. WoodsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Lucarell v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
- Maust v. Bank One Columbus, N.A.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1992
- A & B-Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Central Ohio Building & Construction Trades CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Needham v. the Provident BankOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
134 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.