Legal Opinion

Baltimore Savings & Loan Co. v. Frye

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1984No. 83-369PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCelebrezze, C.J.

This appeal presents two questions for our determination. The first is whether R.C. 4735.12 permits payment of punitive damages included in a judgment against a real estate broker. If the answer is in the affirmative, the second question concerns the statutory dollar limit upon recovery.

I

The superintendent concedes that the amount of the judgment against Frye which represents $12,872.84 in compensatory damages, including $2,500 in attorney fees, is recoverable up to the statutory limit from the Ac*166count. The remainder of the judgment, representing $10,000 in punitive damages, is the subject of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Circle Oaks Sales Co. v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  2. State v. PaceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1982
  3. Vicario v. JenkinsOhio Court of Appeals · 1958

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dent v. WinkleOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Bailey v. GilbertOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Moss v. UlmerOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Honeywell v. RitenourOhio Court of Appeals · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API