# Dunkelman v. Cincinnati Bengals

> Ohio Court of Appeals · December 22, 2006 · 170 Ohio App. 3d 224

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3727930

## Case

- **Full name:** DUNKELMAN Et Al., Appellees, v. CINCINNATI BENGALS, Appellant
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** December 22, 2006
- **Citations:** 170 Ohio App. 3d 224; 2006 Ohio 6825; 866 N.E.2d 576
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Painter
- **Judges:** Sundermann, Painter, Gorman
- **Cited by:** 4 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3727930

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- reversing the trial court’s order 12 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS certifying the class because “the trial court’s entry * * * is devoid of any rationale, yet alone any rigorous analysis, relating to any of the prerequisites for class certification. Given the inadequacy…

## Opinion text

Painter, Judge,
concurring.
{¶ 23} I concur. But I do agree with the dissent insofar as the class certification was too broad. It should be limited to those people who bought the seat licenses and then did not wish to continue buying tickets. The people happy with the present arrangement should not be part of the class.
{¶ 24} The balance of the dissent rehashes what we have previously decided— the seat license was the contract. While the Bengals may have intended otherwise, they were bound by the language they wrote. The rules cannot be changed once the game is over.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3727930. Public record. Not legal advice.