Legal Opinion

Chemical Bank v. Neman

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 1990No. 89-1111PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.

Appellant, Neman, attacks the verdict against him on two grounds, both relating to the quantity and quality of the evidence against him. Neman claims that the trial court erroneously failed to direct a verdict in his favor. We find that this issue was not properly raised on appeal. Neman also contends that the record contains insufficient evidence to support the verdict. We find that the record contains sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and affirm the judgment of the court below.

I

Appeal From the Denial of the Directed Verdict

At the close of Chemical Bank’s case in chief, Neman moved…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Cohen v. Lamko, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Helmick v. Republic-Franklin InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Toledo's Great Eastern Shoppers City, Inc. v. Abde's Black Angus Steak House No. III, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Cardinal v. Family Foot Care Centers, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1987

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

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. Tokles & Son, Inc. v. Midwestern Indemnity Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  2. In re Z.C.Ohio Supreme Court · 2023
  3. Kremer v. CoxOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners' Assn. v. R.E. Roark Cos., Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Ford v. Tandy Transportation, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993

48 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