Trinova Corp. v. Pilkington Bros., P.L.C.

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1994-09-14

Cited by 108 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Moyer, C.J. The primary issue presented is whether LOF may raise as a defense to an action by TRINOVA a term contained in the SEA to which LOF was not a party. Pilkington first contends that the SEA and the TAA are “integrated parts of the entire agreement” and, therefore, terms contained in the SEA are available to LOF as defenses. We believe that Pilkington’s argument is fatally flawed because of its fundamen…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.