Court Opinion

ID: 9689891
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:49:19.653149+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:52.683911
License: Public Domain

WILLIAM S. HOWARD, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judge,
concurring.
I write separately to indicate my agreement with the Panel’s reasoning in subsections (A) and (C). With respect to subsection (B), I agree that there was not sufficient specificity in the state court judgment on this multi-count complaint to allow the bankruptcy court to apply the doctrine of collateral estoppel but I respectfully disagree with the Panel majority’s conclusion that the courts of Ohio require specific findings of fact in every ease to satisfy the “actually litigated” requirement in order to apply the doctrine of collateral estoppel.