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 267 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Northwest Ohio Properties, Ltd. v. Lucas Cty. L-17-1190Specific performance. Easement by estoppel. Trespass. Ejectment.SingerLucas 10/19/2018 10/19/2018 2018-Ohio-4239
State v. Pettaway WD-17-040The trial court properly denied appellant’s motion to suppress where the affidavit in support of the search warrant was based on sufficient probable cause. The court did not err in admitting evidence of appellant’s identity under Evid.R. 404(B). Appellant’s convictions for drug trafficking and possession were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence.PietrykowskiWood 10/19/2018 10/19/2018 2018-Ohio-4241
State v. Williams L-17-1257Appellant completed the sentence imposed, did not request a stay of execution, and did not assert any collateral consequence. Appeal is moot. Judgment affirmed.OsowikLucas 10/19/2018 10/19/2018 2018-Ohio-4237
Smetzer v. Catawba Island Twp. Bd. of Zoning Appeals OT-17-033Zoning appeal dismissed as moot where appellant failed to obtain a stay of execution and construction of a retail store has commenced.JensenOttawa 10/19/2018 10/19/2018 2018-Ohio-4238
In re A.B. L-18-1136Denial of nonparent’s motion for legal custody of neglected and dependent children was supported by a preponderance of the evidence.PietrykowskiLucas 10/17/2018 10/17/2018 2018-Ohio-4206
Weber v. GEICO Cas. Co. WD-18-003Whether or not a coverage increase in appellant’s Ohio automobile policy was triggered to include the statutory minimum Michigan coverage of the subject Michigan accident remains a material fact in dispute. As such, the summary judgment ruling in favor of appellee was not proper. Judgment reversed.OsowikWood 10/12/2018 10/12/2018 2018-Ohio-4158
Ohio Edison Co. v. Houser E-17-063Trial court improperly awarded damages to utility in negligence action for the recovery of costs to replace a utility pole, where the court failed to account for accrued depreciation of the pole and the facilities attached thereto, and erroneously awarded indirect costs that were not proven to a reasonable certainty.JensenErie 10/12/2018 10/12/2018 2018-Ohio-4156
Dicarlo v. Mohr L-18-1185Writ of prohibition. Exercise of judicial or quasi-judicial power. Sua sponte dismissal.SingerLucas 10/11/2018 10/12/2018 2018-Ohio-4157
State v. Stuckman S-17-039, S-17-040The trial court did not abuse its discretion in joining indictments for trial under Crim.R. 13 and 8(A). Attempted aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, and felonious assault convictions were supported by sufficient evidence. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the state’s pretrial motion to amend the indictment to include the defendant’s true name. Judgment affirmed.MayleSandusky 10/5/2018 10/5/2018 2018-Ohio-4050
State v. Thoss S-16-043Conviction reversed and matter remanded for a new trial where the manifest weight of the evidence weighs heavily against the jury’s finding that appellant committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt.PietrykowskiSandusky 10/5/2018 10/5/2018 2018-Ohio-4051