Cleveland v. Washington Mut. Bank
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Cleveland v. Washington Mut. Bank, 2010-Ohio-2957.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 91379 CITY OF CLEVELAND PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK DEFENDANT-APPELLANT JUDGMENT: VACATED AND REMANDED Criminal Appeal from the Cleveland Municipal Court Case No. 2007 CRB 005057 BEFORE: RELEASED: Rocco, J., Sweeney, J., and Boyle, J. June 24, 2010 JOURNALIZED: ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Benjamin D. Carnahan Shapiro, Van Ess, Phillips & Barragate, LLP 1500 West 3d Street, Suite 455 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Robert J. Triozzi Director of Law BY: Andrew A. Meyer Assistant Director of Law City of Cleveland Law Department 601 Lakeside Avenue, Room 106 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court s decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 22. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court s decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court s announcement of decision by the clerk per App.R. 22(E). See, also, S.Ct. Prac.R. II, Section 2(A)(1). KENNETH A. ROCCO, J.: {¶ 1} The Ohio Supreme Court has affirmed our judgment in City of Cleveland v. Washington Mutual Bank, et al., 179 Ohio App.3d 692, 2008 -Ohio- 6956, 903 N.E.2d 384, and remanded the matter to this court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. {¶ 2} In accordance with the supreme court s decision, we vacate the judgment of conviction entered by the municipal court and remand for further proceedings consistent with the Ohio Supreme Court s opinion. Vacated and remanded. KENNETH A. ROCCO, JUDGE JAMES J. SWEENEY, J., and MARY J. BOYLE, J., CONCUR
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
