Legal Opinion

Maust v. Bank One Columbus, N.A.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 15, 1992No. 92AP-122PublishedCited by 200 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Petree, Judge.

Plaintiff, Allan B. Maust, appeals from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, which granted summary judgment to defendant Bank One Columbus, N.A. (“Bank One”) and the individual defendants involved in the termination of plaintiffs employment from the bank. 1 The trial court found that plaintiffs claims stemming from his termination were preempted and precluded by operation of the National Bank Act, Section 24 (Fifth), Title 12, U.S.Code. While plaintiff has challenged this ruling on appeal, we find that plaintiff signed a valid release barring his claims in any event.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Lorain National Bank v. Saratoga ApartmentsOhio Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. Norris v. Ohio Standard Oil Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Blodgett v. BlodgettOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Haller v. Borror Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by200 opinions

  1. Zurz v. 770 West Broad Aga, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. White v. WestfallOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
  3. McGee v. Goodyear Atomic Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. Byrd v. Arbors E. & Subacute Rehab. Ctr.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. Costner Consulting Co. v. U.S. BancorpOhio Court of Appeals · 2011

195 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