Legal Opinion
In Re Rogers Litigation Ms. X, Unpublished Decision (11-7-2003)
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided November 7, 2003No. Court of Appeals No. S-02-042,, Trial Court No. 02-CV-571UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
{¶ 1} In this appeal from a judgment of the Sandusky County Court of Common Pleas, we are asked to consider whether the trial judge erred in certifying this case as a class action. Appellant, Dean K. Rogers, Executor of the Estate of James K. Rogers, sets forth the following assignment of error:
{¶ 2} "The trial court erred by certifying a class `restricted to persons whose privacy has been violated by taping and surveillance by the late Mr. [James K.] Rogers at his various properties' (Class Certification Order at p. 2) and further defined as `all persons or their…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Dianne Castano v. The American Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Thomas A. EVANS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. PIPE & FOUNDRY COMPANY, Etc., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Marks v. C.P. Chemical Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Searles v. Germain Ford of Columbus, L.L.C., 08ap-728 (3-24-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
- Kacin v. Ohio Bur. of Motor VehiclesOhio Court of Appeals · 2025