Legal Opinion
Sinnott v. Aqua-Chem, Inc.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided October 25, 2007No. 2006-1604PublishedCited by 112 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLanzinger, J.
{¶ 1} We accepted this discretionary appeal to resolve whether a trial court’s order finding that a prima facie showing required by R.C. 2307.92 has been made in an asbestos case is a final, appealable order. We hold that it is, because the order prevents a judgment in the action in favor of the appealing party regarding the provisional remedy and leaves the appealing party without a meaningful or effective appellate remedy following final judgment. R.C. 2505.02(B)(4).
Case Background
{¶ 2} In February 2004, before enactment of Am.Sub.H.B. No. 292, 150 Ohio Laws, Part III, 3970 (“H.B. No.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Murphy v. City of ReynoldsburgOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- Horton v. Harwick Chemical Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. MuncieOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Celebrezze v. NetzleyOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- State ex rel. Lyons v. ZaleskiOhio Supreme Court · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by112 opinions
- Kaminski v. Metal & Wire Products Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010
- Lundeen v. GraffOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
- Bennett v. MartinOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
- Wiltshire Capital Partners v. Reflections II, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
- Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. v. Triad Architects, Ltd.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2011
107 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.