# AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp.

> Ohio Supreme Court · April 18, 1990 · 50 Ohio St. 3d 157

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762354

## Case

- **Full name:** AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp. City of Columbus
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 18, 1990
- **Citations:** 50 Ohio St. 3d 157; 553 N.E.2d 597; 1990 Ohio LEXIS 176
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wright
- **Judges:** Brown, Douglas, Fain, Holmes, Moyer, Second, Snick, Sweeney, Wright
- **Cited by:** 1,575 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/6762354

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that an abuse of discretion may not be found simply because the appellate court does not find the trial court’s “reasoning process to be persuasive, perhaps in view of countervailing reasoning processes that would support a contrary result”
- stating that an “appellate court is not permitted to find an abuse of discretion merely because it would have arrived at a different result if it had reviewed the matter de novo”
- holding that a decision constitutes an abuse of discretion “if there is no sound reasoning process that would support” it
- noting that most -9- abuses of discretion occur when a decision is unreasonable, and that “[a] decision is unreasonable if there is no sound reasoning process that would support that decision.”
- stating that "[a] decision is unreasonable if there is no sound reasoning process that would support that decision"

## Opinion text

Wright, J.,
dissenting. I agree *163 with the bulk of the reasoning contained in the majority opinion, but not the result. Using the abuse-of-discretion test as to the actions of Columbus City Council, there is no way a trial court could conclude that summary judgment would not be justified on the basis of the record before us. Thus, I think a remand is nothing more than a useless exercise.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762354. Public record. Not legal advice.