Legal Opinion

Doe v. Moe, Unpublished Decision (10-5-2006)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 5, 2006No. Nos. 86419, 86459Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

{¶ 1} In this consolidated appeal, plaintiffs-appellants, John Doe, Richard Roe, Michael Moe, Mary Moe, and Regina Scolaro (collectively "appellants") are all alleged victims of sexual abuse by priests employed by defendants-appellees, the Catholic Diocese of Cleveland ("Diocese") and Diocese-operated churches and schools. Finding no merit to the appeal, we affirm.

{¶ 2} In 2002, John Doe, Richard Roe, and Michael Moe brought a negligence action against the Diocese and Parmadale alleging that the Diocese and Parmadale were negligent in protecting them from alleged acts…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Dresher v. BurtOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Murphy v. City of ReynoldsburgOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996

15 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