Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Minter
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1972No. 72-236PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLeach, J.
At the outset, we must distinguish between the nature of the two causes of action involved herein. While monetary “judgment” is sought against Tuttle, *209much of the relief sought against Minter would necessarily require official action on the part of the director of the county Welfare Department. The Court of Appeals considered the cause of action against Minter as being one “for illegal suspension of the plaintiff from her position as Social Worker I,” and the cause of action against Tuttle as one “in tort * * ® for interference with her employment.” We shall consider them in the same light.
I
Th…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gregoire v. BiddleCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Caverno v. FellowsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- Johnson v. Ætna Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- Ross v. WrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Feeley v. McAuliffeAppellate Court of Illinois · 1948
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Waite v. Civil Service CommissionWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1978
- Charles L. Boals, Cross-Appellant v. Frank H. Gray, Superintendent, Ohio State Reformatory, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
- Fawcett v. G. C. Murphy & Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1976
- Jackson v. KurtzOhio Court of Appeals · 1979
- Sutherland-Wagner v. Brook Park Civil Service Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.