Royal Electric Construction Corp. v. Ohio State University
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.
Appellees do not dispute that Royal suffered significant monetary losses as a result of delays and disruptions involving the Lazenby Hall and Hamilton Hall projects. In fact, appellees do not challenge the findings of the trial court and court of appeals that they (appellees) were responsible for certain delays and other problems associated with both projects.1 Rather, the sole dispute in this case is whether Royal should be compensated for delay in payment of damages which were due Royal. More specifically, we are asked to determine whether Royal is entitled to $73,394 ($58,338 in connection…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Moskovitz v. Mt. Sinai Medical CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. PhillipsAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
- Braverman v. SpriggsOhio Court of Appeals · 1980
- Shaker Savings Assn. v. Greenwood Village, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1982
- Conti Corp. v. Ohio Department of Administrative ServicesOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
3Cited by96 opinions
- Galmish v. CicchiniOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Landis v. Grange Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Cranpark, Inc. v. Rogers Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
- The Lincoln Electric Company, Plaintiff-Appellee v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant/ Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
- Knott v. Revolution Software, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.