Legal Opinion
Cotterman v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 23, 1987No. 86-1679PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The primary issue raised upon appeal is whether, under the facts presented in the case here, appellant’s motion for prejudgment interest is barred by the passing of time. Because we are in agreement with the reasoning of the court of appeals and for the reasons expressed herein, we affirm the judgments below.
R.C. 1343.03(C) provides for interest on a judgment as follows:
“Interest on a judgment, decree, or order for the payment of money * * * shall be computed from the date the cause of action accrued to the date on which the money is paid, if, upon motion of any party to the action, the court…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Peyko v. FrederickOhio Supreme Court · 1986
3Cited by18 opinions
- Moskovitz v. Mt. Sinai Medical CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Moskovitz v. Mt. Sinai Med. Ctr.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
- Fischer v. Dairy Mart Convenience Stores, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1991
- Schulman v. Wolske & Blue Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1998
- Schiavoni v. RoyOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.