Legal Opinion

Maust v. Meyers Products, Inc.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 18, 1989No. Nos. 55838, 55839, 55840 and 56283PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

John V. Corrigan, Presiding Judge.

Appellants, Meyer Products, Inc. and the Louis Berkman Company (“appellants”), appeal the decision of the trial court wherein summary judgment was granted in favor of appellee, city of Cleveland (“appellee”).

The dispute between the parties arose as a result of a suit filed against appellants. Dora Maust, Administratrix of the Estate of George E. Maust, Jr., filed suit for wrongful death following a fire which occurred in a home rented by the decedent. The complaint alleged that appellants negligently failed to install a fire alarm or smoke detector in the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Haverlack v. Portage Homes, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Enghauser Manufacturing Co. v. Eriksson Engineering Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Sawicki v. Village of Ottawa HillsOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. State v. 1981 Dodge Ram VanOhio Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hupp v. Beck Energy Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
  2. Estate of Hood v. RoseOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
  3. Skerlec v. Ganley Chevrolet, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2012
  4. Foster v. Wells Fargo Financial Ohio, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. Thompson v. GheeOhio Court of Appeals · 2000

10 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