Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

55 Ohio App. 2d 246

380 N.E.2d 749

9 OhioOp.3d 387

Harshaw v. Farrell

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 10, 1977

Ohio Court of Appeals · decided 1977-11-10

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1977-11-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently October 2021

24 state decisions

80197719801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Whiteside, J.,

¶1 concurring in the judgment only. Although I concur in the judgment, I do not concur in that portion of the decision stating that Civ. R. 23 is applicable to habeas corpus actions. The foundation of habeas corpus in Ohio is somewhat different. Both the Ohio statutes and the civil rules as to habeas corpus differ from the federal statutes and the federal rules. It is not necesary, however, to determine herein whether those differences necessitate or justify a different result in Ohio than that which some federal courts have reached applying federal statutes and rules.

¶2 Regardless of whether or not habeas corpus may under some circumstance to maintained as a class action, the present action cannot properly be so maintained for the reason set forth in the majority opinion. Additionally, R. C. 2725.05 would tend to preclude habeas corpus as a remedy for the relief sought.

/55/ohioapp2d/246 · .json · Public domain