Narrative Opinion Summary
In Mahoning App. No. 04 MA 170, 163 Ohio App.3d 609, 2005-Ohio-5056, the court addressed multiple motions filed by the appellants. The appellants sought to strike a portion of the appellees’ second supplement to briefs, their merit brief, and to expedite the consideration of these motions. The court denied all of the appellants' motions. However, Justices O’Donnell and Lanzinger expressed a dissenting opinion, indicating they would have granted the motion to strike a portion of the appellees’ second supplement.
Legal Issues Addressed
Denial of Motionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied all of the appellants' motions, indicating a rejection of the appellants' requests to strike portions of documents and to expedite motion consideration.
Reasoning: The court denied all of the appellants' motions.
Judicial Dissentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Justices O’Donnell and Lanzinger expressed disagreement with the majority opinion by indicating they would have granted the motion to strike a portion of the appellees’ second supplement.
Reasoning: However, Justices O’Donnell and Lanzinger expressed a dissenting opinion, indicating they would have granted the motion to strike a portion of the appellees’ second supplement.