Legal Opinion

Digital & Analog Design Corp. v. North Supply Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1992No. 91-128PublishedCited by 73 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.

Appellant’s propositions of law raise essentially two issues for our review: (1) whether, and under what situations, it is proper to award prejudgment interest, pursuant to R.C. 1343.03(C), if the plaintiff has been awarded punitive damages; and (2) whether a litigant in a tort action is entitled to have a jury determine whether, or in what amount, attorney fees should be awarded. We address each of these issues in turn.

I

R.C. 1343.03(C) reads as follows:

“Interest on a judgment, decree, or order for the payment of money rendered in a civil action based on tortious conduct and not settled by…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Tull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. BombolisSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  4. Columbus Finance, Inc. v. HowardOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Villella v. Waikem Motors, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989

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

3Cited by73 opinions

  1. Zoppo v. Homestead InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Galmish v. CicchiniOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Smith v. PrintupSupreme Court of Kansas · 1993
  4. Akron-Canton Waste Oil, Inc. v. Safety-Kleen Oil Services, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. Coates v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1999

68 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