Legal Opinion

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Chrysler Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1988No. 87-202PublishedCited by 114 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

I

We are presented at the outset with an issue of procedure concerning the scope of remand ordered by the court of appeals. This court has articulated the general rule that “App. R. 12(D) and Civ. R. 42(B) together authorize a court of appeals to order a retrial of only those issues which resulted in prejudicial error.”2 Charles R. Combs Trucking, Inc. v. International Harvester Co. (1984), 12 Ohio St. 3d 241, 12 OBR 322, 466 N.E. 2d 883, paragraph one of the syllabus; Mast v. Doctor’s Hospital North (1976), 46 Ohio St. 2d 539, 75 O.O. 2d 556, 350 N.E. 2d 429. See, also, Trauth v. Dunbar…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Leichtamer v. American Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Lonzrick v. Republic Steel Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Charles R. Combs Trucking, Inc. v. International Harvester Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by114 opinions

  1. Indiana Insurance v. General Electric Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2004
  2. Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. v. Raymond Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  3. Jackson v. Alert Fire & Safety Equipment, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Joseph R. Graham v. American Cyanamid Company, Roy Lee Lundy v. American Cyanamid CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
  5. prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 14,948 Carla Kurczi v. Eli Lilly and Company (96-4124) Dart Industries, Inc., F/k/a Rexall Drug Company (96-4127)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997

109 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