Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ameigh v. Baycliffs Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1998No. 96-1209Published

1DissentLundberg Stratton, J.

Because I believe that the two judgments from the administrative appeals are res judicata, I respectfully dissent and would affirm the court of appeals.

A final judgment on the merits precludes relitigation of the same issues or claims where there is mutuality of the parties involved in the two actions pursuant to res judicata. Grava v. Parkman Twp. (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 379, 653 N.E.2d 226.

The majority determines that the courts in both administrative appeals determined that the “trustees lacked authority to revoke the zoning permit.” Based on that determination, the majority concludes that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Grava v. Parkman TownshipOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. LaBarbera v. BatschOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Stromberg v. Bd. of Edn. of BratenahlOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Mishr v. Board of Zoning AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. City of Cincinnati ex rel. Crotty v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1977

3 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