Jemo Associates, Inc. v. Garman
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtClifford F. Brown, J.
The initial question raised here is whether a counterclaim can be interposed in this action for possession under R. C. Chapter 1923, relating to forcible entry and detainer. The ultimate issue to be decided in this appeal is whether defendant-tenant stated a valid counterclaim when she sought no actual damages, only attorney’s fees. We hold that a right to counterclaim did exist, but having failed to plead actual damages in her counterclaim, defendant-tenant did not state an actionable cause.
h — i
Plaintiff brought these proceedings in forcible entry and *270detainer alléging defendant-tenant was…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Rockey v. 84 Lumber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993
- Forney v. Climbing Higher Enterprises, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
- GMS Management Co. v. AxeCity of Cleveland Municipal Court · 1982
- Haney v. RobertsOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
- Sherman v. PearsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.