Legal Opinion

Rayco Mfg., Inc. v. Murphy, Rogers, Sloss & Gambel

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 29, 2018No. 106714PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, A.J.:

{¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant/cross-appellee Rayco Manufacturing, Inc. ("Rayco") appeals from the trial court's decision granting defendants-appellees/cross-appellants' (collectively, "appellees") 1 motion to enforce a settlement agreement that resolved legal malpractice claims Rayco had filed against appellees. Rayco contends that the trial court erred in finding that there was an enforceable settlement agreement. In their cross-appeal, appellees contend that the trial court erred in denying their request to recover the attorney fees they incurred to enforce the…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Bittner v. Tri-County Toyota, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Kostelnik v. HelperOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Kostelnik v. HelperOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Thomas v. City of ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. Wilborn v. Bank One Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rayco Mfg., Inc. v. Murphy, Rogers, Sloss & GambelOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
  2. Kinnett v. Corporate Document Solutions, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019
  3. Cleveland Hts. v. ColemanOhio Court of Appeals · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API