Woodrow v. Heintschel
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Yarbrough, Judge.
{¶ 1} Appellants, David and Lydia Woodrow, appeal from a judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment in favor of appellee, Tom Heintschel. For the following reasons, we affirm.
{¶ 2} In April 2001, the Woodrows and their company, Ann Arbor Sign, L.L.C., were named defendants in a contract action filed in the Lucas County Common Pleas Court (“the Ann Arbor litigation”). The plaintiff, Detroit Outdoor, alleged that the Woodrows had failed to perform in various respects under the terms of their contract. After initially appearing pro se, the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Vahila v. HallOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Viock v. Stowe-Woodward Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1983
- State v. KeenanOhio Supreme Court · 1993
- Stores Realty Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Krahn v. KinneyOhio Supreme Court · 1989
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Accelerated Sys. Integration Inc. v. Ritzler, Coughlin & Swansiger, Ltd.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2012
- Axline v. Kevin R. Conners, L.L.COhio Court of Appeals · 2015
- Stancik v. HerschOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
- Yost v. McNeaOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
- Felix v. Gerth Law Offices, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.