Legal Opinion

Uebelacker v. Cincom Systems, Inc.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 28, 1988No. C-870720PublishedCited by 91 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff-appellant and cross-appellee Carl 0. Uebelacker has taken the instant appeal from the entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee Cincom Systems, Inc. (“Cincom”) and defendant-appellee and cross-appellant Frank Veith on Uebelacker’s complaint seeking damages for the events surrounding the termination of his employment with Cincom. Veith has also appealed in this matter and, on appeal, challenges the entry of summary judgment for Uebelacker on Veith’s counterclaim for malicious prosecution.

Cincom employed Uebelacker as a sales representative in July 1982. In connection…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Helvering v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Yeager v. Local Union 20, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of AmericaOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Mers v. Dispatch Printing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985

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

3Cited by91 opinions

  1. Akron-Canton Waste Oil, Inc. v. Safety-Kleen Oil Services, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. Dr. Gopal Potti, Kamala Potti, Vinayak Potti, a Minor, and Lakshmi Potti, a Minor, Cross-Appellants v. Duramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
  3. Miller v. WillbanksTennessee Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Hanly v. Riverside Methodist HospitalsOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. People v. HudsonIllinois Supreme Court · 2008

86 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