Legal Opinion

Lantsberry v. Tilley Lamp Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1968No. Nos. 41080 and 41081PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We do not reach the merits of these canses because we find that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to review the order of the trial court. An order overruling a motion to quash is not a final appeal-able order. State, ex rel. Gregory, v. Masheter, 3 Ohio St. 2d 43, Tonio v. Lett & Co. of Indiana, Inc., 65 Ohio App. 304; Section 6, Article IV, Ohio Constitution.

The defendants argue that the order of the trial court is appealable, even if it is interlocutory, because it is the result of an abuse of discretion, but the legal basis of this argument was found to be unsound in Klein v.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Klein v. Bendix-Westinghouse Automotive Air Brake Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1968
  2. State ex rel. Gregory v. MasheterOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Tonio v. Lett & Co. of Indiana, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1940

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lantsberry v. Tilley Lamp Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1971
  2. State ex rel. Northern Ohio Telephone Co. v. WinterOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Venable v. VenableOhio Court of Appeals · 1981

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API