Legal Opinion

Holeton v. Crouse Cartage Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 2001No. 2000-0428PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 92 Ohio St.3d 115.] HOLETON ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. CROUSE CARTAGE COMPANY ET AL.; CONRAD, ADMR., RESPONDENT. [Cite as Holeton v. Crouse Cartage Co.,

2001-Ohio-109.] Workers’ compensation—Subrogation right of statutory subrogee against third party–R.C. 4123.931, in its present form, is unconstitutional. (No. 00-428—Submitted October 10, 2000—Decided June 27, 2001.) ON ORDER from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, Certifying a Question of State Law, No. 98CV-7578. __________________…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. United States v. ButlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  4. Vahila v. HallOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. ShewardOhio Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. San Allen, Inc. v. BuehrerOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
  2. Williams Creek Homeowners Assn. v. Zweifel, 07ap-689 (4-24-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. Stolz v. J & B Steel Erectors, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2014
  4. Anderson v. SchmidtOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Pivonka v. CorcoranOhio Court of Appeals · 2024

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