People ex rel. Albright v. Blair

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• J. Staton’s dissent observing that the time limits of T.R. 76(C) are unambiguous and “[t]o the extent that T.R. 76(C) is inequitable as applied to the facts of this case, only the [S]upreme [C]ourt may address this inequity by amending the rule.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).