Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Brannon v. Austinburg Rehabilitation & Nursing Center

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 5, 2010No. 2009-A-0029Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDiane V. Grendell, Judge

{¶ 46} I agree with the majority’s affirmance of the trial court’s decision as to Brannon’s alleged CSPA violations regarding ARNC’s billing practices and claims against ACDJFS.

{¶ 47} I disagree, however, with the majority’s conclusion that the trial court’s exclusion of the Brannons’ expert testimony and its award of summary judgment in ARNC’s favor as to the Brannons’ claims of negligence and violations of the patients’ bill of rights constituted error. Brannon’s unsupported allegations in the pleadings do not suffice to necessitate the denial of a summary judgment. *674Brannon failed to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. MaurerOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. State v. DiarOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  3. State v. GrubbOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. State v. FrazierOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Gable v. Village of Gates MillsOhio Supreme Court · 2004

3 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