Metropolitan Cablevision, Inc. v. Cox Cable Cleveland Area

604 N.E.2d 765 (1992)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Metropolitan Cablevision, Inc. v. Cox Cable Cleveland Area

Ohio Court of Appeals
604 N.E.2d 765 (1992)

SC

Facts

Cox Cable Television Company (defendant) and Metropolitan Cablevision, Inc. (MetroTen) (plaintiff) were competing cable companies. Upon entering into a subscribership agreement with a customer, Cox would install wiring on and in the subscriber’s home. Specifically, Cox stapled, screwed, or otherwise attached wiring to a subscriber’s floorboards, inside and outside walls, and basement joists. Cox drilled holes through subscribers’ walls where necessary. Cox was not required to remove its wiring from a subscriber’s home after the subscriber ended its subscription. In fact, it was common for Cox to leave its wiring in a home after a subscriber terminated service, due to the frequency of customers re-subscribing and new customers moving in to pre-wired homes. Cox stated that it cost more to remove the wiring than the wiring was worth. If a subscriber moved from Cox to MetroTen, MetroTen would reuse Cox’s internal wiring that it had left. Dawn Mueller (plaintiff) was a Cox subscriber and cancelled her subscription. Cox sought to remove its wiring from Mueller’s home, but Mueller refused to permit Cox to remove the wiring. MetroTen filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment that Cox’s internal wiring was a fixture. The trial court ruled in MetroTen’s favor. Cox appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Matia, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 744,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership