Legal Opinion

ABM Farms, Inc. v. Woods

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1998No. 1996-1803PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 81 Ohio St.3d 498.] ABM FARMS, INC. v. WOODS ET AL., APPELLEES; MAUST ET AL., APPELLANTS. [Cite as ABM Farms, Inc. v. Woods,

1998-Ohio-612.] Arbitration—Enforcing arbitration agreement—Requirement to defeat motion for stay brought pursuant to R.C. 2711.02. To defeat a motion for stay brought pursuant to R.C. 2711.02, a party must demonstrate that the arbitration provision itself in the contract at issue, and not merely the contract in general, was fraudulently induced. (No. 96-1803—Submitted October 22, 1997 at the Muskingum County…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Upton v. TribilcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  4. ABM Farms, Inc. v. WoodsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Haller v. Borror Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Michael A. Gerard, Inc. v. HaffkeOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  2. Wallace v. Ganley Auto GroupOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
  3. Chrysler Fin. Servs. v. HendersonOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Jacob v. Buckeye Chrysler-Jeep-Dodge, 2007-Ca-0121 (7-14-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. Hodell-Natco Industries, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2014

22 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