Legal Opinion · Dissent

Joyce v. General Motors Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 28, 1990No. 88-2049Published

1DissentHolmes, J.

Although I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the court of appeals erred in not reviewing the trial court’s ruling as one for directed verdict, pursuant to Civ. R. 50(A), I cannot concur in the majority’s treatment of the substantive issue presented to us. The majority states the issue as simply “whether an ‘idea’ is property protected under the law.” In relying on federal cases dealing with whether certain “ideas” are or are not patentable, the majority reaches the broader conclusion that appellee’s ideas “were not expressed in a legally protected manner” and thus were not property…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. Strother v. HutchinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1981

17 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