Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Duganitz v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 18, 1996No. 1996-1401PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Per curiam

Duganitz claims that the court of appeals erred in granting the APA’s motion for summary judgment and denying the writ. Civ.R. 56(C) provides that before summary judgment may be granted, it must be determined that (1) no genuine issue as to any material fact remains to be litigated, (2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and (3) it appears from the evidence that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion, and viewing the evidence most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, that conclusion is adverse to the nonmoving party. State ex rel. Cassels v. Dayton City…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Cassels v. Dayton City School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Stahl v. ShoemakerOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Hattie v. AndersonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Flenoy v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Zanders v. AndersonOhio Supreme Court · 1996

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Larkins v. WilkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Havel v. Villa St. JosephOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  3. State ex rel. Dussell v. Lakewood Police DepartmentOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State ex rel. Duganitz v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Courie v. AlcoaOhio Court of Appeals · 2005

47 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