Legal Opinion
Ohio Urology, Inc. v. Poll
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided February 8, 1991No. 90AP-848PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Reilly, Presiding Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff advances the following assignments of error:
“I. The trial court erred in denying Ohio Urology’s application for a temporary restraining order and motion for preliminary injunction.
“II. The trial court erred in dismissing Ohio Urology’s claim for declaratory judgment and specific performance of a covenant not to compete based upon the referee’s report recommending summary judgment in Dr. Poll’s favor.
“HI. The trial court erred…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Raimonde v. Van VlerahOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Arthur Murray Dance Studios of Cleveland, Inc. v. WitterCuyahoga County Common Pleas Court · 1952
- Rogers v. Runfola & Associates, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- Karlin v. WeinbergSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
- Levine v. BeckmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Valley Medical Specialists v. FarberArizona Supreme Court · 1999
- Patio Enclosures, Inc. v. HerbstCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Wall v. Firelands Radiology, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1995
- Murfreesboro Medical Clinic, P.A. v. UdomTennessee Supreme Court · 2005
- Lexis-Nexis v. BeerDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1999
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.