You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Laidlaw Waste Sys., Inc. v. Consol. Rail Corp.

Citations: 84 Ohio St. 3d 1403; 701 N.E.2d 1015; 1998 Ohio LEXIS 3340Docket: 98-1274

Court: Ohio Supreme Court; November 15, 1998; Ohio; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

A state law question was certified to the court from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. The petitioner submitted a reply brief on November 12, 1998, which was past the due date of November 2, 1998, as per S.Ct. Prac.R. XVIII(7). Due to S.Ct. Prac.R. XIV(1)(C), which prohibits the late filing of briefs, the court ordered that the petitioner’s reply brief be stricken.

Legal Issues Addressed

Deadline for Filing Briefs under S.Ct. Prac.R. XVIII(7)

Application: The petitioner's reply brief was deemed late as it was filed after the specified deadline, leading to its removal from consideration.

Reasoning: The petitioner submitted a reply brief on November 12, 1998, which was past the due date of November 2, 1998, as per S.Ct. Prac.R. XVIII(7).

Late Filing of Briefs Prohibited under S.Ct. Prac.R. XIV(1)(C)

Application: The court applied the rule prohibiting late filing of briefs by striking the petitioner’s reply brief that was filed after the deadline.

Reasoning: Due to S.Ct. Prac.R. XIV(1)(C), which prohibits the late filing of briefs, the court ordered that the petitioner’s reply brief be stricken.