Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Curless v. Lathrop Co.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 24, 1989No. OT-89-9PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Glasser, Judge.

This matter is before the court on appeal from a judgment of the Ottawa County Court of Common Pleas.

The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows. On November 6, 1984, James Curless was employed as a laborer by the Lathrop Company. Lathrop had been engaged by defendants-appellees, Toledo Edison and Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, to perform certain job operations at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant in Oak Harbor, Ohio. Among the jobs Lathrop contracted to perform was a reinforcement of cement columns used to support the cooling tower.

In order to reinforce the…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Corsetti v. Stone Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
  3. Hirschbach v. Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Tauscher v. Puget Sound Power & Light Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Conover v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Fleck v. ANG Coal Gasification Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Thompson v. JessUtah Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Best v. Energized Substation Service, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Traudt v. Potomac Electric Power Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
  5. Hesselbach v. Toledo Museum of ArtLucas County Court of Common Pleas · 1995

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API