Ohio Court of Appeals· 7/18/2022
Bradshaw v. Bradshaw
Citations
- 2022 Ohio 2448
Syllabus
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant-appellant's motion for a continuance. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it named plaintiff-appellee the residential parent and legal custodian of the parties' minor children.
Judges: Miller
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 14,330×
- Miller v. MillerOhio Supreme Court· 1988-06-01· cited 1,173×
- State v. UngerOhio Supreme Court· 1981-07-01· cited 1,145×
- Bechtol v. BechtolOhio Supreme Court· 1990-02-14· cited 384×
- Masters v. MastersOhio Supreme Court· 1994-04-27· cited 229×
- Sandusky Properties v. AveniOhio Supreme Court· 1984-12-31· cited 88×
- Brammer v. BrammerOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-07-01· cited 27×
- Brammer v. MeachemOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-02-07· cited 25×
- Musto v. Lorain Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2016-12-13· cited 23×
- Loewen v. NewsomeOhio Court of Appeals· 2018-01-10· cited 13×
- State v. KlemanOhio Court of Appeals· 2019-10-28· cited 10×
- State v. ShureldsOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-05-03· cited 5×
- In re A.G.M.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2010-10-25· cited 4×
- In re V.G.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2021-10-04· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.