Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sekeres v. Arbaugh

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1987No. 86-1098Published

1DissentHerbert R. Brown, J.

I respectfully dissent because I believe that the majority should address (but does not) an issue that causes a substantial chill on the requirement of Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution that the courts of Ohio be open to every person for the administration of justice without denial or delay.

In this case, Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., a corporation of worldwide dimension, has provided in its pre-printed customer *29agreement that if the customer makes a claim against the corporation, the customer shall pay “any cost incurred by Merrill, Lynch in successfully defending…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Schulke Radio Productions, Ltd. v. Midwestern Broadcasting Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Elias Siegelman, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Eva Siegelman, Deceased v. Cunard White Star LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
  3. Motorists Mutual Insurance v. TrainorOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Wheeler v. St. Joseph HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. Standard Oil Company of California v. Clyde A. PerkinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965

10 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