Legal Opinion

Ohio Motor Vehicle Dealers Board v. Remlinger

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1983No. 83-3PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClifford F. Brown, J.

The sole issue is whether the trial court abused its discretion in not compelling Remlinger to testify before the administrative board following the board’s appeal to the court of common pleas pursuant to R.C. 119.09. We hold the trial court did abuse its discretion in not compelling Remlinger to testify, and that the court of appeals committed reversible error in affirming the trial court.

R.C. 119.09 requires:

“In any case of disobedience or neglect of any subpoena served on any person or the refusal of any witness to testify to any matter regarding which he may lawfully be interrogated, the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Gardner v. BroderickSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Provident Bank v. WoodOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Farrand v. State Medical BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Crowl v. DeLucaOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Ohio State Medical Board v. ZwickOhio Court of Appeals · 1978

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ohio State Board of Pharmacy v. FrantzOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Pulley v. MalekOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Harmon v. BaldwinOhio Supreme Court · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API