Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Cosgrove v. Williamsburg of Cincinnati Management Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 21, 1994No. 92-2549Published

1ConcurrenceAlice Robie Resnick, J.

Although I concur fully in the court’s decision, I am compelled to write separately for three reasons. First, I believe it is incumbent upon the court to set forth a more definitive test to identify whether a liability created by statute is penal or remedial. Second, I feel it necessary, in light of today’s decision, to explain and distinguish our recent decision in Bellian v. Bicron Corp. (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 517, 634 N.E.2d 608. Third, I wish to stress that how victims of different discriminatory practices are treated regarding time limitations on the independent civil remedies afforded…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. MisselSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Huntington v. AttrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. Helmick v. Cincinnati Word Processing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Richard L. Smith and Deborah L. Smith v. No. 2 Galesburg Crown Finance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980
  5. Denis J. Murphy, Trustee v. Household Finance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977

16 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