Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Taft v. Court of Common Pleas

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1992No. 91-1240PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Per curiam

For the following reasons, we deny the writ.

I

Supplemental Complaint

Civ.R. 15(E) states:

“Supplemental pleadings. Upon motion of a party the court may, upon reasonable notice and upon such terms as are just, permit him to serve a supplemental pleading setting forth transactions or occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented. Permission may be granted even though the original pleading is defective in its statement of a claim for relief or defense. If the court deems it advisable that the adverse party plead to the supplemental pleading, it…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Adams v. GusweilerOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Peltz v. City of South EuclidOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  3. State ex rel. Albright v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Seringetti Construction Co. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Arbor Health Care Co. v. JacksonOhio Court of Appeals · 1987

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. City of Galion v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Ohio Council 8, AFL-CIO, Local No. 2243Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State ex rel. Columbia Reserve Ltd. v. Lorain County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State ex rel. Municipal Construction Equipment Operators' Labor Council v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  4. State ex rel. Brenders v. HallOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. One Energy Ents., L.L.C. v. Dept. of Transp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019

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