Quonset Hut, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.
The decision to dismiss a case pursuant to Civ.R. 41(B)(1) is within the sound discretion of the trial court.1 Jones v. Hartranft (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 368, 371, 678 N.E.2d 530, 534; Pembaur v. Leis (1982), 1 Ohio St.3d 89, 91, 1 OBR 125, 126, 437 N.E.2d 1199, 1201. Our review of such a dismissal is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion. Jones, 78 Ohio St.3d at 371, 678 N.E.2d at 534. Abuse of discretion “ ‘connotes more than an error of law or of judgment; it implies an unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable attitude on the part of the court * * *.’ ”…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Tokles & Son, Inc. v. Midwestern Indemnity Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
- Pembaur v. LeisOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- DeHart v. Aetna Life InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Jones v. HartranftOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Ohio Furniture Co. v. MindalaOhio Supreme Court · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by132 opinions
- Sazima v. ChalkoOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Hillabrand v. Drypers Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 2000
- Simeone v. Girard City Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 2007
- Cuspide Properties, Ltd. v. Earl Mechanical Servs.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2015
- Manley v. Heather Hill, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
127 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.