Case Title: Schottenstein v. Schottenstein

Citation: 2003-Ohio-1088

Docket Number: 20020050

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2003-03-26T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Schottenstein v. Schottenstein, 98 Ohio St.3d 1210, 2003-Ohio-1088.] 
 
 
SCHOTTENSTEIN, APPELLANT, v. SCHOTTENSTEIN, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as Schottenstein v. Schottenstein, 98 Ohio St.3d 1210, 2003-Ohio-1088.] 
Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed. 
(No. 2002-0050 — Submitted February 12, 2003 — Decided March 26, 2003.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, Nos. 00AP-1088, 00AP-
1284, 01AP-36, 01AP-94, 01AP-95 and 01AP-227, 2001-Ohio-3987. 
__________________ 
{¶1} 
The cause is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently 
allowed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, BATCHELDER and O’CONNOR, JJ., 
concur. 
 
PFEIFER and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., dissent. 
 
WILLIAM G. BATCHELDER, J., the Ninth Appellate District, sitting for 
COOK, J. 
__________________ 
 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, J. dissenting. 
{¶2} 
I believe that this appeal should not be dismissed as having been 
improvidently allowed. 
{¶3} 
The issue presented for our consideration was who has the burden 
of proving whether an increase in value of separate property during marriage is 
marital or separate property.  I believe that this is an important issue upon which 
Ohio courts disagree.  Therefore, I would not dismiss this appeal as having been 
improvidently allowed but would resolve the issue presented for review.  
Accordingly, I respectfully dissent. 
 
PFEIFER, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion. 
__________________ 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
Kegler, Brown, Hill & Ritter, L.P.A., Anthony J. Celebrezze and Robert 
G. Cohen, for appellant. 
 
Baker & Hostetler L.L.P., Barry H. Wolinetz and David C. Levine, for 
appellee. 
__________________