Case ID: ohio-st-3d_127/html/0122-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Conley et al., Appellees, v. Faurecia Exhaust Systems, Inc. et al.; R & D Machine, Inc., Appellant.
    [Cite as Conley v. Faurecia Exhaust Sys., Inc., 127 Ohio St.3d 122, 2010-Ohio-5272.]
    (No. 2010-1192
    Submitted September 28, 2010
    Decided November 2, 2010.)
    Volkema, Thomas, Miller & Scott, Michael S. Miller, and Warner M. Thomas Jr., for appellees.
    Freund, Freeze & Arnold, Gordon D. Arnold, and Patrick J. Janis, for appellant.
   {¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted on Proposition of Law No. I.

{¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of Pettiford v. Aggarwal, 126 Ohio St.3d 413, 2010-Ohio-3237, 934 N.E.2d 913, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals for further proceedings consistent with Pettiford v. Aggarwal.

Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.

Brown, C.J., and Pfeifer, J., dissent and would not accept the discretionary appeal.