Legal Opinion

Schultz v. Elm Beverage Shoppe

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1988No. 88-313PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.

We are confronted in this appeal by a question which we have not heretofore addressed, i.e., whether a store owner, store operator or his agent may be held liable in tort for injuries sustained by a customer during a robbery of the premises. Because we find that the conduct of the store clerk, David Wildes, was reasonable in light of the urgency of the situation, we reverse the court of appeals and hold that summary judgment was properly entered in favor of appellant in the case sub judice.

A person “who otherwise would be liable for a tort is not liable if he acts in pursuance of and within…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Strother v. HutchinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Noll v. MarianSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  3. Young v. Desert View Management Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1969
  4. Yingst, Spec. Admin. v. PrattIndiana Court of Appeals · 1966
  5. Schubowsky v. Hearn Food Store, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1971

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Smith v. Ameriflora 1992, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994
  2. Leichtman v. Wlw Jacor Communications, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994
  3. Matter of GettysUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1997
  4. Starling v. Ohio Dept. of Dev. DisabilitiesOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  5. Leding v. Eastern Oklahoma Medical CenterCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API