Sciko v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion and would reverse the trial court’s ruling and remand this action based upon the majority’s misinterpretation of Civ.R. 12(B), State ex rel. Baran v. Fuerst (1990), 55 Ohio St.3d 94, 563 N.E.2d 713, and State ex rel. Scanlon v. Deters (1989), 45 Ohio St.3d 376, 544 N.E.2d 680. Specifically, a review of the record reveals the assumptions that the trial court converted CEI’s motion to dismiss into one for summary judgment and then granted it are unsupported assumptions.

CEI’s motion to dismiss was based on three arguments: It breached no duty to…