Davis v. State of Ohio, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Case No. CV96-312322
plaintiff's filing, opposition, summary judgment, standing, statute of limitations, laches
The State’s motion argued the affirmative defenses of (1) abatement, (2) standing, (3) statute of limitations, and (4) laches. The Estate argues that it is apparent the State is unhappy with the court's rulings on these defenses and wishes to assert them one more time in the hopes that the court will reverse itself. The Estate claims that this repetitive and wasteful litigation should not be rewarded with a favorable decision by the court and that the State's motion should be denied.
The State's Motion for Summary Judgment was denied on 1/24/2000; see docket
Gilbert, Terry H. and Carr, George H., "Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment" (1999). 1995-2002 Court Filings. 43.