Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

139 Ohio St. 3d 1487

Dodd v. Croskey

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 2014

Ohio Supreme Court · decided 2014-07-24

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently July 2017

3 state decisions

Relies on State v. Emerson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2014-07-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Harrison App. No. 12 HA 6, 2013-Ohio-4257. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Harrison County.

¶2*1488Upon consideration of appellants’ motion to strike briefs, it is ordered by the court that the motion is denied.

O’Donnell and Kennedy, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part.Lanzinger, J., not participating.
O’Donnell, J.,

¶3concurring in part and dissenting in part.

¶4In accord with State v. Emerson, 129 Ohio St.3d 1464, 2011-Ohio-4449, 952 N.E.2d 1150, State v. LaPrairie, 129 Ohio St.3d 1420, 2011-Ohio-3607, 950 N.E.2d 973, and Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Berk, 129 Ohio St.3d 1435, 2011-Ohio-4001, 951 N.E.2d 789, I would grant the motion to strike as to John Croskey’s brief because of its failure to comply with mechanical requirements, and I would order that he file a conforming brief within ten days of the entry. I would deny the motion to strike as to the brief of Harriet Evans.

Kennedy, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.
/139/ohiost3d/1487 · .json · Public domain