Case Citator › Saunders v. McFaul

Saunders v. McFaul

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Declined by some courts
Court
Ohio Court of Appeals
Citation
71 Ohio App. 3d 46
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
132 of 132
Citing cases (total)
174
Treatment dates
1992
Declined by some courts
At least one reviewed court has declined to follow this case. No reviewed court has overruled it. Saunders v. McFaul was declined in part among the reviewed cases: all 132 flagged citations have been read, with one confirmed treatment listed below. Williams v. Franklin County rejected Saunders's statement that a political subdivision did not include a sheriff.
More on how this was screened

Every other reviewed opinion applied Saunders positively for Ohio's de novo summary-judgment standard; the repeated word “overruled” said that a motion must be overruled when reasonable minds could find for the nonmoving party or disposed of an assignment of error, rather than adversely treating Saunders.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

174 later cases cite Saunders v. McFaul; 132 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Saunders v. McFaul?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Declined to Follow

  • The Tenth District rejected Saunders's statement that a political subdivision does not include a sheriff as erroneous and inconsistent with both the Tenth District's precedent and Ohio's statutory classification of police services as a governmental function.

    Williams v. Franklin County · Ohio Court of Appeals, Tenth District · filed

    Upon appeal, plaintiff argues that the operation of the sheriffs department is a proprietary function, relying upon the case of Saunders v. McFaul (1990), 71 Ohio App.3d 46, 593 N.E.2d 24. While that court did state that a political subdivision did not include the sheriff, that statement is erroneous and in conflict with our decision in Twine v. Franklin Cty. Sheriff's Dept. (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 51, 587 N.E.2d 411, and with the provisions of R.C. 2744.01(C)(2)(a), which describes police services as a governmental function.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Saunders v. McFaul and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace