Case Name: Hooten v. Safe Auto Ins. Co.
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2002-10-30
Citations: 97 Ohio St. 3d 1420
Docket Number: 2002-1349
Parties: Hooten v. Safe Auto Ins. Co.
Judges: Douglas and P.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 97
Pages: 1420–1420

Head Matter:
[Cite as 10/30/2002 Case Announcements, 2002-Qhio-5820.]
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS
October 30, 2002
MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS
2002-1349.
Hooten v. Safe Auto Ins. Co.

Opinion:
Hamilton App. No. C-010576. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals' entry dated August 2, 2002:
"Must a trial court, before ruling on a motion for summary judgment under Civ.R. 56, either set an oral or non-oral hearing date or establish a cut-off date for parties to submit affidavits or materials opposing the motion?"
Douglas and P.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent.
The conflict ease is Hall v. Klien (Sept. 3, 1999), Wood App. No. WD-99-001, 1999 WL 682584.