Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Watkins v. Eighth District Court of Appeals

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 5, 1998No. 98-435PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Per curiam

Motion to Intervene

Cleveland Clinic seeks to intervene as a respondent. Cleveland Clinic is the appellant in the underlying proceeding stayed by the court of appeals. Based on our duty to liberally construe Civ.R. 24 in favor of intervention, Cleveland Clinic’s compliance with the mandatory procedural requirements of Civ.R. 24(C), and relators’ failure to object to Cleveland Clinic’s intervention, we grant Cleveland Clinic’s motion and allow it to intervene as a respondent here. State ex rel. SuperAmerica Group v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Elections (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 182, 184, 685 N.E.2d 507,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Findlay Publishing Co. v. SchroederOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Levin v. City of Sheffield LakeOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State ex rel. Edwards v. Toledo City School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. Dehler v. SutulaOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Miley v. ParrottOhio Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine v. Board of TrusteesOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. State ex rel. Charvat v. FryeOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Fisher v. HasenjagerOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  4. State v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  5. State ex rel. R.W. Sidley, Inc. v. CrawfordOhio Supreme Court · 2003

43 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