Opinion

Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Evatt

  • 143 Ohio St. 71
  • 143 Ohio St. (N.S.) 71
  • 28 Ohio Op. 21
  • 54 N.E.2d 132
  • 1944 Ohio LEXIS 383
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 22, 1944
Status
Published
Author
Bell
On the bench
Turner, Bell, Weygandt, Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Williams
Cited by
61 cases

“There is no authority for [a] request for findings of fact and conclusions of law separately stated”

How later courts described this case

  • “There is no authority for [a] request for findings of fact and conclusions of law separately stated”

Written by the judges who cited it.

Distinguished

  • Distinguished by Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Comm. v. Bowen, Unpublished Decision (7-10-2003) (2003)

    {¶ 28} Wheeling Steel and similar cases are easily distinguishable from the instant matter because here there is a controlling statute applicable to the Board's actions.
    Ohio Court of AppealsJul 10, 2003Read it

The opinion

Bell, J.,

concurs in paragraphs one to seven, inclusive, of the syllabus and in the judgment.

Williams, J., concurs in the judgment.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.