Legal Opinion

Tasin v. SIFCO Industries, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1990No. 89-91PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.

Appellant Tasin challenges the trial court’s entry of judgment against him based on the answers to the special interrogatories and the court’s refusal to grant a new trial based on his allegations of impropriety in the jury deliberations. For the reasons which follow, we reject these challenges and affirm the judgment of the court below.

I

Entry of Judgment on Special Interrogatories

In the instant case, the trial court held that the jury’s answers to interrogatory Nos. 7 and 8, finding that SIFCO had just cause to discharge Tasin, were “inconsistent” with the general verdict, and entered…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Tanner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. McDonald v. PlessSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Otte v. Dayton Power & Light Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Big John, B v. V. Indian Head Grain CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
  5. Becker v. BancOhio National BankOhio Supreme Court · 1985

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. SchiebelOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. RobbOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State v. LoftinNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1996
  4. Salemi v. Cleveland Metroparks (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State v. RobbOhio Supreme Court · 2000

19 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