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 281 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Southard Supply, Inc. v. Anthem Contrs., Inc. 16AP-545The trial court did not err in finding plaintiff's conduct frivolous under R.C. 2323.51(A)(2)(a)(iii) and ordering plaintiff to pay $5,000 in reasonable attorney fees to defendantKlattFranklin 8/22/2017 8/22/2017 2017-Ohio-7298
In re Guardianship of Schwarzbach 16AP-670Probate court decision appointing guardian for appellant was supported by clear and convincing evidence of incompetence.SadlerFranklin 8/22/2017 8/22/2017 2017-Ohio-7299
State ex rel. Bradford v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. 16AP-750Magistrate did not err by dismissing relator's complaint seeking a writ of mandamus ordering respondent, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, to correct its records consistent with the decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio in State ex rel. Bradford v. Dinkelacker, 146 Ohio St.3d 219, 2016-Ohio-2916, and to conduct another review of his application for executive clemency filed April 24, 2014. The Bradford decision does not constitute "significant new information that was not and could not have been presented in the [April 24, 2014] application." Ohio Adm.Code 5120:1-1-15(I). Complaint dismissed; writ denied.SadlerFranklin 8/22/2017 8/22/2017 2017-Ohio-7300
State v. Gibson 17AP-200The trial court erred in finding that criminal defendant recently transferred into custody of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction had not alleged that issue of miscalculation of jail-time credit had not been raised at sentencing when such language appeared on the face of his pro se motion. It was also error to deny his motion by thus denying the trial court's continuing jurisdiction to correct jail-time credit errors pursuant to R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(g)(iii).BrunnerFranklin 8/17/2017 8/17/2017 2017-Ohio-7254
BNA Constr. Ltd. v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs. 16AP-317The common pleas court did not abuse its discretion in affirming a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Review Commission which found that workers performing services for appellant were employees and not independent contractors. Judgment affirmed.DorrianFranklin 8/15/2017 8/15/2017 2017-Ohio-7227
State v. Hayes 16AP-531Convictions for murder and felonious assault were not against the manifest weight of the evidence when surveillance video and testimony of surviving victim supported the jury's determination that the appellant was the shooter.TyackFranklin 8/10/2017 8/10/2017 2017-Ohio-7185
State v. Adams 16AP-755Trial court did not err by denying appellant's motion to suppress evidence uncovered in the warrantless search of his vehicle. Under the collective knowledge doctrine, a uniformed officer who received a radio call from an undercover officer informing him that appellant had committed an illegal U-turn was competent to testify about the factual basis for the subsequent traffic stop even though he did not witness the violation. Because a reasonable suspicion that appellant had just completed an illegal drug transaction arose during a lawful traffic stop, appellant's extended detention in order for a K-9 unit to conduct a sweep of appellant's vehicle did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 8/10/2017 8/10/2017 2017-Ohio-7186
State v. Brodbeck 17AP-61The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion for leave to file an untimely motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence pursuant to Crim R. 33.DorrianFranklin 8/10/2017 8/10/2017 2017-Ohio-7187
In re E.R. 17AP-82 & 17AP-84Judgments affirmed. Competent, credible evidence supported the trial court's determination that granting the motion for permanent custody of the children services agency and divesting appellant of her parental rights was in the best interests of the minor children.HortonFranklin 8/10/2017 8/10/2017 2017-Ohio-7188
Trent v. Taylor 17AP-89Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying supervised parenting time until parties engaged in reunification counseling and followed recommendation of the counselor.TyackFranklin 8/10/2017 8/10/2017 2017-Ohio-7189