Legal Opinion · Dissent

AFC Interiors v. DiCello

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 1989No. 88-1541Published

1DissentH. Brown, J.

To reach its decision, the majority has misread and misapplied the Uniform Commercial Code, ignored the overwhelming weight of authority in other jurisdictions, and overruled the long-standing decisional law of this state, most particularly as pronounced in Seeds Grain & Hay Co. v. Conger (1910), 83 Ohio St. 169, 93 N.E. 892. Further, the majority reverses the unanimous decision of the court of appeals and the judgment granted in the trial court. I respectfully, but vigorously, dissent.

At common law, an accord and satisfaction is accomplished when a creditor accepts and deposits a check which…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Horn Waterproofing Corp. v. Bushwick Iron & Steel Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
  2. Jahn v. BurnsWyoming Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Scholl v. TallmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Department of Fisheries v. J-Z Sales Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1980
  5. Flambeau Products Corp. v. Honeywell Information Systems, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1984

22 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