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.

Preferred Capital, Inc. v. AI & Lou Builders Supply, Inc.

Citations: 109 Ohio St. 3d 1494; 848 N.E.2d 857Docket: 2006-0506

Court: Ohio Supreme Court; June 7, 2006; Ohio; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Discretionary appeal accepted regarding Proposition of Law Nos. I and II in Summit App. No. 22654, 2006-Ohio-250. The case is held pending the decision in 2005-2134, Preferred Capital, Inc. v. Power Engineering Group, Inc., involving multiple Summit App. numbers (22475, 22476, 22477, 22478, 22485, 22486, 22487, 22488, 22489, 22497, 22499, 22506, and 22513) and cited as 163 Ohio App.3d 522, 2005-Ohio-5113. The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed. Chief Justice Moyer, along with Justices Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, expressed willingness to accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. III. Justice O’Connor indicated acceptance of the appeal solely on Proposition of Law No. I.

Legal Issues Addressed

Discretionary Appeal Process

Application: The court accepted a discretionary appeal concerning specific propositions of law, indicating a selective review process based on case significance or legal questions presented.

Reasoning: Discretionary appeal accepted regarding Proposition of Law Nos. I and II in Summit App. No. 22654, 2006-Ohio-250.

Judicial Agreement on Proposition of Law

Application: The Chief Justice and two Justices expressed agreement to accept the appeal on an additional proposition of law, showing a partially unified judicial stance on the issues presented.

Reasoning: Chief Justice Moyer, along with Justices Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, expressed willingness to accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. III.

Selective Acceptance by Justice

Application: Justice O’Connor specifically agreed to accept the appeal only on one proposition of law, demonstrating the individual discretion exercised by justices in deciding appeal points.

Reasoning: Justice O’Connor indicated acceptance of the appeal solely on Proposition of Law No. I.

Stay of Briefing Schedule

Application: The court has stayed the briefing schedule for the appeal, pending a decision in a related case, indicating a procedural pause to wait for potential precedent or guidance.

Reasoning: The case is held pending the decision in 2005-2134, Preferred Capital, Inc. v. Power Engineering Group, Inc., involving multiple Summit App. numbers... The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed.