BARNHILL v. HAMILTON, 100 Ohio St.3d 66 (2003)

2003-Ohio-5029, 796 N.E.2d 521

Barnhill et al., Appellants v. City of Hamilton, Appellee.

No. 2002-1575.Supreme Court of Ohio.Submitted September 17, 2003.
Decided October 8, 2003.

Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Butler County, No. CA2002-03-052.

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals on Proposition of Law No. I is affirmed on the authority of Armstrong v. Best Buy Co., Inc., 99 Ohio St.3d 79, 2003-Ohio-2573, 788 N.E.2d 1088.

{¶ 2} Proposition of Law No. II is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.

O’Connor, Acciari Levy, L.L.C., Barry D. Levy and Michael D. Weisensel, for appellants.

Rendigs, Fry, Kiely Dennis, L.L.P., Wilson G. Weisenfelder Jr. and Laura I. Munson, for appellee.

Page 67