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 68 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
1031 Properties, L.L.C. v. Bearden CA2020-03-046The trial court abused its discretion in vacating the default judgment where the tenants failed to show their failure to answer the complaint constituted excusable neglect.M. PowellButler 4/12/2021 4/12/2021 2021-Ohio-1232
Gordon v. Mt. Carmel Farms, L.L.C. CA2020-09-054The trial court erred by denying appellants' motion to dismiss brought pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6) where the appellees' claims brought against them pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 failed given one of the appellants, the director of a township zoning department, was entitled to qualified immunity, whereas the other appellant, the township, was not alleged to have violated any custom or policy for which it could be held liable given that a township cannot be held liable under a theory of respondeat superior.S. PowellClermont 4/12/2021 4/12/2021 2021-Ohio-1233
State v. Bowles CA2020-09-065Anders no error.Per CuriamWarren 4/12/2021 4/12/2021 2021-Ohio-1234
In re K.G. CA2020-08-047; CA2020-08-048; CA2020-08-049The juvenile court did not err by granting a children services agency permanent custody of the children where a grant of permanent custody was in the children's best interests and the children had been in the custody of the agency for approximately 18 months at the time the agency moved for permanent custody of the children.M. PowellClermont 4/7/2021 4/7/2021 2021-Ohio-1182
In re K.F. CA2020-10-061; CA2020-10-062The juvenile court did not err by granting a children services agency permanent custody of the child where a grant of permanent custody was in the child's best interest and the child had been in the custody of the agency for 20 months at the time the agency moved for permanent custody of the child. ByrneClermont 4/7/2021 4/7/2021 2021-Ohio-1183
State v. Tipton CA2020-05-011Defendant's guilty plea was voluntarily entered where the trial court's incorrect postrelease control statement during the plea colloquy did not constitute a complete failure to comply with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(a) and where defendant failed to show he was prejudiced by the trial court's postrelease control misstatement and that he would not have entered a guilty plea if he had been properly advised of the duration and mandatory nature of the postrelease control. M. PowellMadison 4/5/2021 4/5/2021 2021-Ohio-1128
Lovejoy v. Diel CA2020-06-067The trial court erred dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The agreement between the parties was not a land installment contract because it did not meet the definition of a land installment contract provided by R.C. 5313.01(A) or contain the elements mandated by R.C. 5313.02(A). Because the agreement was not a land installment contract under R.C. Chapter 5313, appellant did not need to pursue a foreclosure action pursuant to R.C. 5313.07 and the trial court did not lack subject matter jurisdiction.ByrneButler 4/5/2021 4/5/2021 2021-Ohio-1124
State v. Stout CA2020-08-085The trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to suppress as the officer had probable cause to initiate a traffic stop where appellant was in violation of city ordinances requiring appellant to have a mounted light on the bicycle he was operating on the city's streets at nighttime. Moreover, even if there had not been probable cause to initiate the traffic stop, the attention doctrine applied to prevent the methamphetamine found on appellant's person from being suppressed as the discovery of the drugs was sufficiently attenuated by the officer's discovery of a pre-existing warrant for appellant's arrest. HendricksonButler 4/5/2021 4/5/2021 2021-Ohio-1125
Lykins Oil Co. v. Corbin CA2020-07-036The trial court improperly modified a preliminary injunction before first finding that a balancing of the facts supported a change in circumstances. The trial court also should have permitted appellant to cross-examine appellee in order to elicit evidence.PiperClermont 4/5/2021 4/5/2021 2021-Ohio-1126
State ex rel. Becker v. Faris CA2020-10-058Relator was not entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel respondent, a county prosecutor, a "formal and/or systematic investigation" into the purported "criminal behavior" engaged in by the Governor of Ohio, Mike DeWine, for his handling of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic where the respondent's actions in reviewing the private citizen affidavit filed by relator under R.C. 2935.09(D), as well as the applicable criminal statutes referenced therein, satisfied the prosecutor's statutory duty to conduct an "investigation" into the allegations contained within relator's private citizen affidavit pursuant to R.C. 2935.10(A).S. PowellClermont 4/5/2021 4/5/2021 2021-Ohio-1127