Legal Opinion

Horman v. Veverka

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1987No. 86-952PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue presented is whether a court of appeals has jurisdiction to review the decision of a trial court to vacate a dismissal for want of prosecution and to reinstate a case on its docket.

Here it seems clear that the trial judge did not intend his dismissal of August 22, 1984 to be with prejudice. The trial judge had not, as required by Civ. R. 41(B), given notice to plaintiffs’ counsel prior to issuing that order. The order of vacation came within two weeks of the dismissal and specified that the case be reinstated on the court’s docket.

It has long been settled that, during a term of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wagner v. LongOhio Supreme Court · 1937

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. McAuley v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Rice v. Bethel Associates, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. W.A.F.P., Inc. v. Sky Fuel, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2024
  4. In Re Guardianship of MaurerOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. Teays Valley Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. StruckmanOhio Court of Appeals · 2023

6 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