Wills v. Frank Hoover Supply
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The sole issue before this court is whether the trial court erred in granting the appellants’ motions for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the decision of the court of appeals is reversed as to appellant Bowerston, and affirmed as to appellant Hoover.
*188It is axiomatic that a motion for summary judgment shall only be granted when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Summary judgment shall not be granted unless it appears from the evidence that reasonable minds could come to but one conclusion and that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
- Cooper v. RooseOhio Supreme Court · 1949
- Berkowitz v. WinstonOhio Supreme Court · 1934
- Soles v. Ohio Edison Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1945
- Ripple v. Mahoning National BankOhio Supreme Court · 1944
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by69 opinions
- Smiddy v. Wedding Party, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
- Simmers v. Bentley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
- Jeffers v. OlexoOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- Littleton v. Good Samaritan Hospital & Health CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Commerce & Industry Insurance v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 1989
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.