 |
Litigation
At
Skidmore & Associates, we try cases. In many instances
the law and prior precedent do not provide a foregone outcome
based on law and fact. Each case generally provides for a
unique set of circumstances. In our justice system, decisions
are made by individuals intending to render a fair, equitable,
and impartial decision, however, the human element in the
decision-making process provides fallibility. Our approach
to litigation consists of fundamental advocacy - establish
a clear and concise record. This approach aids our clients
at trial and provides a foundation for appeal, if necessary.
Types of litigation in which the firm is regularly involved: |
|
|
- Bankruptcy Litigation
- Boundary Disputes
- Complex Litigation
- Commercial Litigation
- Construction Litigation
- Contract and Business Disputes
- Creditor's Rights
|
- Employment Disputes
- Municipal Corporation Litigation
- Non-Competition Litigation
- Personal Injury & Property Disputes
- Probate & Trust Litigation
- Shareholder Disputes
|
Appellate Litigation
Whether judging horse shows or Olympic events, decision-makers
sometimes error in rendering decisions. After taking into consideration
the cost involved, our clients, with our assistance, will make a
decision on whether or not to appeal a trial court decision. Skidmore
& Associates has an active appellate practice in federal and
state courts, involving a wide range of individual and business
litigation. Our attorneys have successfully initiated and defended
appeals.
Examples of appeals we have handled for individuals, corporations
and other entities include the following:
- Obtained a reversal in Federal District Court of a bankruptcy
court order that failed to return possession to a commercial landlord
after a groundlease was "deemed rejected" under Section 365 of the
Bankruptcy Code; City of Akron v. Airspect Air, Inc., U.S.
District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 5:96CV2276.
- Obtained a reversal of a Domestic Relations Court for dismissal
of a Divorce Proceeding and its failure to enforce an in-court
settlement agreement relative to the evaluation and disribution
of a family owned printing company (s-corporation); Marcia
L. Torrence v. Randall Torrence v. Torrence, Fifth Appellate
District, Case No. 96-CA-0223; Torrence v. Torrence, Fifth
Appellate District Case No. 96-CA-0276.
- Skidmore & Associates was involved in litigation that began
in the trial court in December, 1984 and concluded by a decision
in the Ohio Supreme Court in July, 1993.This case went up through
the Court of Appeals twice, which involved a real estate developer
and an individual providing capital. Skidmore & Associates
obtained a reversal of the Court of Appeals, wherein the Ohio
Supreme Court reinstated the judgment of the trial court. The
Ohio Supreme Court concluded that an Appellate Court must not
substitute its judgment for that of the trial court where there
exists some credible evidence supporting the findings of fact
and conclusions of law. The case is often cited for this standard
of review. Myers v. Garson, 66 Ohio St. 3d 610 (1993).
Our trial attorneys and litigation attorneys have represented clients throughout Northeast Ohio including Akron, Barberton, Bath,Canal Fulton, Canton, Copley, Cuyahoga Falls, Fairlawn, Green, Hudson, Jackson Twp., Lakemore, Macedonia, Massillon, North Canton, Norton, Peninsula, Springfield Twp., Stow, Twinsburg, Wadsworth, Wooster, Cuyahoga County, Stark County, Summit County, Wayne County, and Medina County .
|
 |