Legal Opinion
Clark v. Connor
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided July 8, 1998No. 97-1240PublishedCited by 69 opinions
1Per curiam
Oral Argument
Clark requests oral argument for this appeal pursuant to S.CtPrac.R. IX(2). Among the factors we consider in determining whether to grant oral argument in appeals in which oral argument is not required is whether the case involves a matter of great public importance, complex issues of law or fact, a substantial constitutional issue, or a conflict between courts of appeals. See State ex rel. McGinty v. Cleveland City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 283, 286, 690 N.E.2d 1273, 1276.
For the following reasons, oral argument is not warranted here. First, this appeal does…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Harry L. Reynolds, Jr. v. International Amateur Athletic Federation, the Athletic CongressCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
- Lak, Inc. v. Deer Creek EnterprisesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
- Goldstein v. ChristiansenOhio Supreme Court · 1994
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by69 opinions
- Kauffman Racing Equipment, L.L.C. v. RobertsOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- State Ex Rel. Asti v. Ohio Department of Youth ServicesOhio Supreme Court · 2005
- National City Commercial Capital Corp. v. AAAA At Your Service, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2007
- State ex rel. Toma v. CorriganOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State ex rel. United States Steel Corp. v. ZaleskiOhio Supreme Court · 2003
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.