Legal Opinion

Dooley v. Barberton Citizens Hospital

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1984No. 83-40PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.

The issue before us is whether Barberton Citizens Hospital, through its by-laws, illegally discriminated against appellant, a licensed Doctor of Podiatric Medicine because of his practice as a podiatrist. For the reasons set forth below we find such discrimination had occurred. Accordingly we reverse the court of appeals and remand as hereinafter set forth.

This cause has witnessed a number of transformations in the hospital’s by-laws. Because of the importance of the issues to be resolved it is necessary to examine the factual basis of this case with close attention to the hospital by-laws…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division v. CraftSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Davidson v. Youngstown Hospital Ass'nOhio Court of Appeals · 1969
  3. Khan v. Suburban Community HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Rupe v. FourmanDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1981

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Holt v. Good Samaritan Hospital & Health CenterOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. Paul A. Stern v. Tarrant County Hospital District v. George J. LuibelCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
  3. Fort Hamilton-Hughes Memorial Hospital Center v. SouthardOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Siegel v. St. Vincent Charity Hospital & Health CenterOhio Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. Paul A. Stern v. Tarrant County Hospital District v. George J. LuibelCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API