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

Reporter of Decisions - Opinions & Announcements

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:   What is Year Decided?
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 456 rows. Rows per page: 
12345678910...>>
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Hawkins v. State 15AP-979Judgment reversed, case remanded, and motion to take judicial notice and supplement the record overruled. The trial court's entry granting appellant's petition under R.C. 2950.031(E) contesting his Adam Walsh Act sex offender classification exceeded the scope of relief allowed by the statute.HortonFranklin 12/6/2016 12/6/2016 2016-Ohio-8016
State ex rel. Everhart v. Indus. Comm. 15AP-1020Request for writ of mandamus compelling an order granting a C-9 request for approval of an MRI denied where relator failed to demonstrate that MRI was sought to explore a more specific diagnosis in an allowed claim rather than treatment of an allowed condition.KlattFranklin 12/6/2016 12/6/2016 2016-Ohio-8017
Star Merchandise, L.L.C. v. Haehn 16AP-39In an appeal from a trial court judgment denying appellant's Civ.R. 60 motion, this court does not have jurisdiction to review assignments of error pertaining exclusively to the prior unappealed judgment from which appellant sought Civ.R. 60(B) relief. Trial court did not err when it denied appellant's Civ.R. 60(A) motion for relief from judgment because the trial court "mistakes" alleged by appellant were not clerical in nature. Trial court did not err when it denied appellant's Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment because Civ.R. 60(B)(1) and (5) may not be used to correct legal errors in judgments and because a motion for relief from judgment may not be used as a substitute for a timely appeal. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 12/6/2016 12/6/2016 2016-Ohio-8018
Inrex Home Care, L.L.C. v. Ohio Dept. of Dev. Disabilities 16AP-814Motion for injunction denied.Per curiamFranklin 12/2/2016 12/2/2016 2016-Ohio-7986
Williams v. Columbus 16AP-269On review of summary judgment, construing the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, dash cam video evidence demonstrated that reasonable minds could differ about whether a police officer drove wantonly in executing a U-turn into a lane of oncoming traffic that was screened from his view with the result that an accident occurred, and thus the trial court correctly denied summary judgment immunity to the defendants.BrunnerFranklin 12/1/2016 12/1/2016 2016-Ohio-7969
Katju v. Bavadekar 16AP-325, 16AP-456Judgment affirmed; appellee's motion for attorney fees denied. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding appellant guilty of extreme cruelty, and awarding appellee a divorce on those grounds. In addition, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in using appellant's testimony to corroborate appellee's testimony, and in awarding attorney fees. Also, the trial court did not commit plain error in accepting the parties agreed upon division of assets and liabilities, and in the management of the presentation of evidence and testimony at the divorce hearing.HortonFranklin 12/1/2016 12/1/2016 2016-Ohio-7970
Hillman v. Larrison 16AP-374Judgment reversed and case remanded for the trial court to comply with this court's previous mandate in Hillman v. Larrison, 10th Dist. No. 15AP-730, 2016-Ohio-666. Because the validity of appellant's affidavit had already been established, the trial cout's sua sponte evaluation of its validity on a previous remand violated the law of the case doctrine.HortonFranklin 12/1/2016 12/1/2016 2016-Ohio-7971
State v. Shaskus 14AP-812Trial court erred in granting appellee's motion to suppress evidence seized from e-mail account.BrownFranklin 11/29/2016 11/29/2016 2016-Ohio-7942
Wasserstrom v. Battelle Mem. Inst. 15AP-849Judgment affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in the handling of discovery and evidentiary disputes. Appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination. As such, the trial court correctly granted Battelle's motion for summary judgment.HortonFranklin 11/29/2016 11/29/2016 2016-Ohio-7943
State v. Brown 15AP-935In a prosecution of appellant for forgery, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's motion for mistrial when the trial court sustained appellant's objection to an improper question by the trial court, struck the question from the record, and immediately instructed the jury that they must not consider the prosecutor's question for any reason. Appellant's conviction of forgery was supported by sufficient evidence in the record and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 11/29/2016 11/29/2016 2016-Ohio-7944
12345678910...>>