1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Ohio
  4. 100 Ohio
  5. 100 Ohio St.3d 66 (2003)
 

BARNHILL v. CITY OF HAMILTON

No. 2002-1575.

100 Ohio St.3d 66 (2003)

2003-Ohio-5029

BARNHILL ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. CITY OF HAMILTON, APPELLEE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided October 8, 2003.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

O'Connor, Acciari & Levy, L.L.C., Barry D. Levy and Michael D. Weisensel, for appellants.

Rendigs, Fry, Kiely & Dennis, L.L.P., Wilson G. Weisenfelder Jr. and Laura I. Munson, for appellee.

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals on Proposition of Law No. I is affirmed on the authority of Armstrong v. Best Buy Co., Inc., 99 Ohio St.3d 79, 2003-Ohio-2573, 788 N.E.2d 1088.

{¶ 2} Proposition of Law No. II is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O'CONNOR and O'DONNELL, JJ., concur.

PFEIFER...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases