Seal of the State of Ohio. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. Line Drawing of the Ohio Judicial Center. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page.
Spacer image

The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System

Opinion Search Filter Settings
Use standard search logic for the Opinion Text Search (full-text search). To search the entire web site click here
Opinion Text Search:   What is Opinion Text Search?
Search Truncation Warning:
Source:    What is a Source?
Year Decided From:
Year Decided To:    What is Year Decided?
Year Decided Range Warning:
County:    What is County?
Case Number:    What is Case Number?
Author:    What is Author?
Topics and Issues:    What are Topics and Issues?
WebCite No: -Ohio-    What is a Web Cite No.? WebCite and Citation are unique document searches. If a value is entered in the WebCite or Citation field, all other search filters are ignored. If values are entered in both the WebCite and Citation fields, only the WebCite search filter is applied.
Citation:    What is Citation?
This search returned 87 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State ex rel. Mango v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. 18AP-945The magistrate did not err in determining facts and law and in recommending denial of relator’s request for writ of mandamus to order the Ohio Adult Parole Revocation Hearing Committee of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction to reinstate his parole or grant him a new revocation hearing. Relator’s objections overruled. Magistrate’s Decision adopted. Request for writ of mandamus/habeas corpus denied.DorrianFranklin 4/15/2021 4/15/2021 2021-Ohio-1314
R & J Solutions, Inc. v. Moses 19AP-703On the facts of the case, trial court erred in requiring appellant to present expert testimony in order to establish breach in attorney malpractice action where appellee missed a discovery deadline resulting in admissions being deemed admitted. Trial court erred in failing to apply "some evidence of the merits of the underlying claim" standard in determining whether the causation element was met.DorrianFranklin 4/15/2021 4/15/2021 2021-Ohio-1315
Bibb v. Garrett 19AP-878The trial court erred by ruling on appellee's motion to reinstate and motion for default judgment filed after a final judgment was entered that extinguished appellee's claims for relief. The case was reversed and remanded to the trial court to vacate the judgment entry filed on November 22, 2019 which was a nullity.DorrianFranklin 4/15/2021 4/15/2021 2021-Ohio-1316
Pankey v. Ohio State Hwy. Patrol 20AP-234The trial court did not err in granting the motion of the Ohio State Highway Patrol for summary judgment pursuant to Civ.R. 56(C), and thus did not err in dismissing appellant's action. When viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to appellant, reasonable minds could only conclude that the force used by Trooper Doebrich in arresting appellant under the facts and circumstances of this case was reasonable and not excessive. The judgment of the Court of Claims of Ohio is affirmed.Beatty BluntFranklin 4/15/2021 4/15/2021 2021-Ohio-1317
State ex rel. Ugicom Ents., Inc. v. Morrison, Admr., Bur. of Workers' Comp. 17AP-895The magistrate did not err in concluding that there was some evidence to support the administrative designee's order that the installers and inspector of relator were employees and not independent contractors. We also find there are both factual and legal distinctions between this court's decision in Barcus v. Buehrer, 10th Dist. No. 14AP-942, 2015-Ohio-3122 and the instant case. Objections overruled. Writ denied.MentelFranklin 4/13/2021 4/13/2021 2021-Ohio-1269
Real Time Resolutions, Inc. v. Vogelpohl 20AP-241The trial court's decision granting summary judgment in favor of appellee was not a final, appealable order so as to vest this court with jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Appeal dismissed.MentelFranklin 4/13/2021 4/13/2021 2021-Ohio-1270
State v. Elkins 20AP-411The trial court did not err in denying Elkins' motion for nunc pro tunc judgment as the changes Elkins' sought were substantive legal changes not appropriate for correction by nunc pro tunc entry.Luper SchusterFranklin 4/13/2021 4/13/2021 2021-Ohio-1271
In re Baby Boy N. 20AP-440The trial court did not err when it adopted the magistrate’s decision terminating the parental rights of appellee. No party requested findings of fact and conclusions of law under Juv.R. 40 and appellee, who never established paternity, did not object to the magistrate’s decision to grant the motion for permanent custody. The agency made the reasonable efforts at reunification required by R.C. 2151.419, as evidenced by repeated attempts to assist appellee with establishing paternity. The trial court did not err when it overruled the objection to exclude appellee’s mother as a witness at the permanent custody hearing, who never intervened as a party, as the purported subject matter of her testimony was not relevant to the best interests of the child under R.C. 2151.414. Judgment affirmed.MentelFranklin 4/13/2021 4/13/2021 2021-Ohio-1272
Le v. Ohio Indus. Comm. 19AP-404The magistrate properly concluded that there is some evidence in the record to support the board's denial of relator's application for permanent total disability ("PTD") benefits. Because there is some evidence in the record supporting the board's decision, the board did not abuse its discretion in denying realtor's application, and therefore, relator is not entitled to mandamus relief. Objections overruled; magistrate's decision adopted; and petition for writ of mandamus denied.Beatty BluntFranklin 4/6/2021 4/6/2021 2021-Ohio-1169
Calypso Asset Mgt., L.L.C. v. 180 Indus., L.L.C. 20AP-122 & 20AP-124The trial court erred in its calculation of attorney fees and in its analysis of frivolous conduct. Therefore, the trial court’s judgment was reversed and the matter was remanded to the trial court with instructions to enter $161,292.40 in attorney fees and costs to be paid under the settlement agreement and to reconsider the previous sanctions award.CrouseFranklin 4/6/2021 4/6/2021 2021-Ohio-1171