DeHart v. Aetna Life Insurance

The critical considerations in this case are whether the Court of Appeals: (1) properly dismissed appellant’s case, sua sponte, for failure to comply with Local Rule 4(E) of the Eighth Appellate District, (2) abused its discretion in overruling appellant’s motion for reconsideration and leave to file an amended praecipe, and (3) erroneously failed to discern the requisite “good cause”3 for reinstating appellant’s case.

As we ruled in Vorisek v. North Randall (1980), 64 Ohio St. 2d 62,4 each district Court of Appeals has the power, pur*191suant to Section 5, Article IV of the Ohio Constitution,5 to…