Legal Opinion

Kowal v. Ohio Poly Corp.

Carroll County Court of Common Pleas

Decided April 13, 1987No. 17387-85-360PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.

I. Case Review

On December 6, 1985, plaintiffs filed their complaint seeking compensatory and punitive damages against defendant, Fred Kowal’s former employer, based upon alleged intentional tort. (Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc. [1982], 69 Ohio St. 2d 608, 23 O.O. 3d 504, 433 N.E. 2d 572.) Defendant was properly served with summons and process on December 10, 1985.

*23Defendant, Ohio Poly Corporation, filed its answer on January 7, 1986, containing a general denial asserting affirmative defenses of the statute of limitations and failure to state a claim.

Pretrial conferences…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Viock v. Stowe-Woodward Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Hounshell v. American States InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1981

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brady v. Safety-Kleen Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1989
  2. Sanfrey v. USM Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API