Legal Opinion
State ex rel. Add Venture, Inc. v. Gillie
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided May 14, 1980No. 79-1335PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Per curiam
Relators assert that Civ. R. 52 gives them the right to demand, and the court the duty to state, separate *165findings of fact and conclusions of law in issuing a preliminary injunction. Relators rely in part upon Fed. R. Civ. P. 52 and federal cases decided thereunder. Such reliance is misplaced.
Civ. R. 52 by its terms concerns “judgments.” A preliminary injunction is not a judgment. Moreover, Fed. R. Civ. P. 52 contains the following language: “* * *[I]n granting or refusing interlocutory injunctions the court shall similarly set forth the findings of fact and conclusions of law which…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State ex rel. Northern Ohio Telephone Co. v. WinterOhio Supreme Court · 1970
- Jones v. First National Bank of BellaireOhio Supreme Court · 1931
- Forest Hills Utility Co. v. WhitmanOhio Supreme Court · 1975
3Cited by4 opinions
- Department of Administrative Services v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- State ex rel. Tilford v. CrushOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- State ex rel. Pearson v. MooreOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Kalk v. Village of WoodmereOhio Court of Appeals · 1985