Legal Opinion

City of Akron v. Carter

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 10, 2010No. Nos. 25037 and 25038PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Dickinson, Presiding Judge.

INTRODUCTION

{¶ 1} Following a court-ordered mediation conference in an appropriation proceeding, the mediator filed a report indicating that the parties had reached a settlement. The city of Akron later moved the trial court for a determination that the terms of a settlement agreement reached during mediation are not privileged under Ohio’s Uniform Mediation Act, R.C. Chapter 2710. The landowner, Roger Carter, responded with a motion in limine to exclude all mediation communications under the privilege. The trial court determined that the terms of a settlement…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Chef Italiano Corp. v. Kent State Univ.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State v. GrubbOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Med. Mut. of Ohio v. SchlottererOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Kala v. Aluminum Smelting & Refining Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Russell v. Mercy HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. WFG Natl. Title Ins. Co. v. MeehanOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
  2. Pirock v. CrainOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  3. State v. JohnstonOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
  4. Reo v. Univ. Hosp. Health Sys.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019
  5. Litster Frost v. Idaho Injury Law GroupIdaho Supreme Court · 2022

27 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