Legal Opinion

Sogg v. Zurz

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided January 13, 2011No. 10AP-358PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Tyack, Judge.

{¶ 1} This is the second round of appeals of litigation between a class represented by Wilton S. Sogg and the Ohio Department of Commerce. In the first round of appeals, the Supreme Court of Ohio determined that the Ohio Department of Commerce was to pay interest on unclaimed funds being held by the department. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the trial court to make a computation of the amount of that interest. See Sogg v. Zurz, 121 Ohio St.3d 449, 2009-Ohio-1526, 905 N.E.2d 187.

{¶ 2} Based on documents filed with the trial court, the trial judge assigned to the case…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Griffith v. J.C. Penney Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  2. State ex rel. Ocasek v. RileyOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Sogg v. ZurzOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Sogg v. White, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division2006

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. San Allen, Inc. v. BuehrerOhio Court of Appeals · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API