652 N.E.2d 202-204Supreme Court of Ohio.
1995.
MOTION DOCKET Thursday, July 27, 1995 85-1209. State v. Scott. Cuyahoga County, No. 48609. On motion to set execution date. Motion granted.
Page 1418
94-722. State v. Fautenberry. Hamilton County, No. C-920734. On motion for stay of execution pending filing and disposition of appeal to the United States Supreme Court. Motion granted.
95-587. Time Warner AxS v. Pub. Util. Comm. Public Utilities Commission, No. 93-487-TP-ALT. On motion to consolidate briefing schedule with 95-588 and 95-589, infra, motion to consolidate briefing schedule by Office of Consumers’ Counsel et al., and motion to consolidate briefing schedule by Ameritech Ohio. Motions granted, with limit of one hundred two pages total.
F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., would set limit at fifty pages.
COOK, J., would allow no additional pages.
95-588. AT T Communications of Ohio, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm. Public Utilities Commission, Nos. 93-487-TP-ALT and 93-576-TP-CSS. On motion to consolidate briefing schedule with 95-587, supra, and 95-589, infra, motion to consolidate briefing schedule by Office of Consumers’ Counsel et al., and motion to consolidate briefing schedule by Ameritech Ohio. Motions granted, with limit of one hundred two pages total.
F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., would set limit at fifty pages.
COOK, J., would allow no additional pages.
95-589. MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Pub. Util. Comm. Public Utilities Commission, Nos. 93-487-TP-ALT and 93-576-TP-CSS. On motion to consolidate briefing schedule with 95-587 and 95-588, supra, motion to consolidate briefing schedule by Office of Consumers’ Counsel et al., and motion to consolidate briefing schedule by Ameritech Ohio. Motions granted, with limit of one hundred two pages total.
F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., would set limit at fifty pages.
COOK, J., would allow no additional pages.
95-846. State v. Williams. Trumbull County, No. 89-T-4210. On motion for stay of execution. Motion granted.
95-1158. State v. Brooks. Cuyahoga County, No. 57034. This cause is an appeal of the court of appeals’ denial of appellant’s motion to vacate the journal entry of July 27, 1994, denying appellant’s delayed application for reconsideration.
IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that this case shall be treated as a discretionary appeal and a claimed appeal of right and shall proceed pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. III.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that the appellee may file a memorandum in response to appellant’s memorandum in support of jurisdiction on or before August 28, 1995.
95-1354. State v. May. Hamilton County, No. C-940862. On motion for stay of execution. Motion denied.
WRIGHT and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent.