Legal Opinion

Connin v. Bailey

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 13, 1984No. 84-560PublishedCited by 72 opinions

1Per curiam

The sole issue presented is whether the doctrine of laches constitutes a complete defense to a claim, instituted after some thirty-five years, to recover arrearages in child support and alimony against decedent’s estate. This court concludes that, based on this record, the doctrine of laches does not operate to bar this claim.

The applicable law is not in dispute. “Laches is an omission to assert a right for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, under circumstances prejudicial to the adverse party. It signifies delay independent of limitations in statutes. It is lodged principally in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kinney v. MathiasOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Smith v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals · 1957
  3. Beiter v. BeiterOhio Court of Appeals · 1970

3Cited by72 opinions

  1. Daugherty v. Central Trust Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Emrick v. Multicon Builders, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Thirty-Four Corp. v. Sixty-Seven Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. State ex rel. Case v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Wilkes Associates v. Hollander Industries Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2001

67 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