Legal Opinion

Baughn v. City of Reynoldsburg

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 12, 1992No. 91AP-1470PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tyack, Judge.

On May 1, 1991, Steve Baughn filed a complaint in the court of common pleas seeking a declaratory judgment, a writ of mandamus and compensatory damages because of alleged factual inaccuracies in what was to be a personal information system pursuant to R.C. 1847.01 et seq. Baughn, who is a police officer in Reynoldsburg, named the city of Reynoldsburg, its mayor, its safety director and its chief of police as defendants. Following service of process, an answer was filed by all the named defendants on June 21, 1991. The record does not indicate that any discovery was conducted…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wing v. Anchor Media, Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Westfield Insurance v. Huls America, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1998
  2. Smith v. Ameriflora 1992, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994
  3. Re v. Kessinger, Ca2007-02-044 (1-22-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. Woodbridge Partners Group, Inc. v. Ohio Lottery CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
  5. Conley v. Lindsay AcuraOhio Court of Appeals · 1997

7 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