Legal Opinion

Hillabrand v. Drypers Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 19, 2000No. Nos. 98-2435 and 98-2444PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Francis E. Sweeney, Sr., J.

Hillabrand argues in this case that the trial court prematurely granted appellee’s Civ.R. 37 motion for sanctions, dismissing his case with prejudice, without allowing him sufficient time to contest the motion. We agree and therefore reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.

Civ.R. 41(B)(1) permits a trial court to dismiss an action for failure to comply with a court order, but only after notice to plaintiffs counsel. This court has held that a dismissal with prejudice is proper only “when counsel has been informed that dismissal is a possibility and has had a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Quonset Hut, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Ohio Furniture Co. v. MindalaOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Logsdon v. NicholsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Sazima v. ChalkoOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. McGlone v. GrimshawOhio Court of Appeals · 1993

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Wallner v. ThorneOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
  2. Watershed Mgt., L.L.C. v. NeffOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  3. Esser v. MurphyOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  4. Farmer v. PNC Bank, N.A.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. FIA Card Services, N.A. v. SalmonOhio Court of Appeals · 2009

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