Legal Opinion
Atkinson v. Grumman Ohio Corp.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided June 1, 1988No. 87-1023PublishedCited by 90 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.
The issue before this court is whether reasonable notice of a final order is required to be given to parties by the deciding court to protect the parties’ right to appeal. We find that such notice must be given and reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.
This case presents an issue that has been previously decided by this court. We stated in Moldovan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Welfare Dept. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 293, 295, 25 OBR 343, 345, 496 N.E. 2d 466, 467, that “[t]he opportunity to file a timely appeal pursuant to App. R. 4(A) is rendered meaningless when reasonable notice of an appealable…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Griffin v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Hurtado v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- State v. AwanOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- McKane v. DurstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- Swander Ditch Landowners' Ass'n v. Joint Board of HuronOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Coles v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2005
- Central Ohio Transit Authority v. TimsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
- Automated Solutions Corp. v. Paragon Data Systems, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2006
- Brown v. Akron Beacon Journal Publishing Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1991
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.