Legal Opinion

Condon v. Body, Vickers & Daniels

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 5, 1994No. 66542PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Joseph Nahra, Chief Justice.

Eric Condon, plaintiff-appellant, appeals a decision from the trial court granting summary judgment in favor of Body, Vickers, Daniels et al. in Condon’s action for breach of contract, infliction of emotional distress, and tortious interference with a business contract. Condon assigns four errors for our review:

“I. The trial court erred in granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment with respect to Eric Condon’s promissory estoppel claim, since the evidence presented to the trial court established a claim for promissory estoppel and several issues of fact…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Wing v. Anchor Media, Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Mers v. Dispatch Printing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Peter L. Battista, Jr. v. Lebanon Trotting Association, and John J. Carlo, Peter L. Battista, Jr. v. Lebanon Trotting Association, and John J. CarloCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1976
  4. Helmick v. Cincinnati Word Processing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Uebelacker v. Cincom Systems, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1988

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Dorricott v. Fairhill Center for AgingDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1998
  2. Walter v. Adt Security Sys., 06ap-115 (6-29-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. Daup v. Tower Cellular, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. Fitzgerald v. Roadway Express, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2003
  5. Dahl v. Battelle Memorial Institute, Unpublished Decision (7-22-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004

14 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