Williams v. Spitzer Autoworld Canton, L.L.C.
Ohio Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceCupp, J.
{¶ 23} I join the majority opinion in all respects. I write separately to explain why I believe that the facts in this case distinguish it from some other situations in which the parol evidence rule does not bar the admission of certain evidence to support claims made under the Consumer Sales Practices Act (“CSPA”). In *553addition, I write to address why in my view, this case is distinguishable from the situation presented to the Second District Court of Appeals in Wall v. Planet Ford, Inc., 159 Ohio App.3d 840, 2005-Ohio-1207, 825 N.E.2d 686, upon which the court of appeals here heavily relied.
{…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Galmish v. CicchiniOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Einhorn v. Ford Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
- Bellman v. American International GroupOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- Williams v. Spitzer Auto World Canton, 2007 Ca 00187 (5-27-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008