Legal Opinion

Green v. Huntington National Bank of Columbus

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1965No. 39312PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTaft, C. J.

The first question to be decided is whether what defendant does in its “estate analysis” program amounts to the practice of law.

The Court of Appeals found in substance that, in defendant’s conduct of that program, the defendant provides “specific legal information in relation to the specific facts of a particular person’s estate * * * for the purpose of obtaining a more beneficial estate condition in relation to tax and other consequences of death.” We believe that the record fully supports such a finding even if we confine the word “consequences” to “legal consequences”; and we believe that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Sperry v. Florida Ex Rel. Florida BarSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. DworkenOhio Supreme Court · 1934
  4. STATE BAR ASSN. v. Connecticut Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
  5. Judd v. City Trust & Savings BankOhio Supreme Court · 1937

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. EstepOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. KathmanOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Akron Bar Ass'n v. MillerOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Pietz v. Toledo Trust Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Trumbull County Bar Ass'n v. HannaOhio Supreme Court · 1997

11 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