Legal Opinion

In Re Thrush

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided August 1, 1988No. 88AP020013PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMilligan, J.

The father filed a timely notice of appeal of the January 6, 1988 judgment of the Tuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas, modifying visitation and granting supervised visitation.

He assigns a single error:

“The trial court has failed to furnish appellant a statement of the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, as required by Civil Rule 52. Such failure prevents the appellant from knowing the basis for his failure on the merits and thus what grounds for appeal he may have.”

If the appellant is entitled to separate written findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Civ. R. 52…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Werden v. CrawfordOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Appleby v. ApplebyOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Roudebush v. RoudebushOhio Court of Appeals · 1984

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Delph v. City of GreenfieldOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. Balliett v. Horan, Unpublished Decision (7-27-1998)Ohio Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Braatz v. BraatzOhio Supreme Court · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API