Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Monday, February 6, 2017

Brief filed: Stewart v. Vivian

Today we filed our reply brief in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the appellant in Stewart v. Vivian. You can read the brief here.

Stewart relates to the proper interpretation of section 2317.43 of the Revised Code. The docket is here. Our merits brief was filed in November, and the appellee's brief was filed last month.

The case is scheduled for argument on Thursday, April 6.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Oral argument scheduled in Stewart v. Vivian

The Court has scheduled argument in our case Stewart v. Vivian for Thursday, April 6. I'm pleased to note that the argument will be conducted in Morgan County, Ohio, as part of the Court's off-site program, which has as a goal the education of high school students about the Court and legal system. While I'm disappointed we won't be going to the Court's home in Columbus, the off-site program gives students a chance to interact with the Justices and lawyers, which is great. I participated in a similar program in December, albeit with the Chamber of Commerce, rather than students.

Some prior discussion of the Stewart case can be found here. We will file, and I will share, our reply brief on Monday.

Monday, January 30, 2017

Brief filed: R&R Family Investments v. The Plastic Moldings Corp.

Today we filed a notice of appeal and a jurisdictional brief in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the appellant in R&R Family Investments v. The Plastic Moldings Corp., et al. You can read the brief here.

At issue in the case is whether a property owner owes a duty to people outside the land with regard to naturally occurring conditions of which the owner has actual knowledge. More particularly, our brief asks the Court to accept the appeal in order to adopt Section 54 of the Restatement Third of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm.

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Conditional dismissals, appellate jurisdiction, compulsory counterclaims, and you

Civil procedure and appellate jurisdiction wonks may be interested in the Eight District's decision in Myocare Nursing Home, Inc. v. Hohmann. The question is whether the civil rules allow for conditional dismissals, and if so whether a conditional dismissal confers appellate jurisdiction over the order disposing of the remaining claims.