 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Strasel v. Seven Hills Ob-Gyn Assocs., APPEAL NOS. C-050341, C-050364,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, HAMILTON COUNTY, January 19, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's denial of a new trial motion by a doctor and a medical practice in a patient's action, arising from her misdiagnosed pregnancy and subsequent procedure which posed a serious health risk to the baby, was not an abuse of discretion, as the jury verdict for the patient was supported by the evidence and the damages were not excessive.
|
|||||
| Weisbarth v. Geauga Park Dist., CASE NO. 2005-G-2675,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, GEAUGA COUNTY, January 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted summary judgment to a park district in an action by a former park employee, asserting the right to purchase the canine that she had worked with, as she had no statutory right under R.C. § 9.62 to do so where the canine unit had not been disbanded.
|
|||||
| Wilson v. Wilson, C.A. CASE NO. 21443,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, January 19, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A former wife's remarks to the parties' priest and to a family member that the husband was a pedophile and that he viewed child pornography on the computer were not actionable defamation where the husband indicated that the listeners did not believe the remarks and that he suffered no harm to his career as a result.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
