Legal Opinion

Wyatt v. Wyatt

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1992No. 91-1611PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerbert R. Brown, J.

This case presents a convoluted history of litigation between plaintiff and defendant to collect child support payments. However, the only issues before this court are (1) whether the Alaska judgment is entitled to full faith and credit, and (2) whether res judicata applies to the Alaska court’s decision. That court found the plaintiff had consented to the CSED settling her URESA claim for less than its full amount.

There is no doubt that the CSED, through Alaska’s Attorney General, has absolutely no authority to compromise URESA claims of Ohio citizens without their consent or approval.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Milliken v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Durfee v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. National Amusements, Inc. v. City of SpringdaleOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Morrow v. New Moon Homes, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Litsinger Sign Co. v. American Sign Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1967

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Holzemer v. UrbanskiOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Fifth Third Bank, N.A. v. Maple Leaf Expansion, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. Fine v. America Online, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. Holzemer v. UrbanskiOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Wood v. FliehmanOhio Court of Appeals · 2011

8 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