|
|
In re Estate of Coughenour
| CA2025-10-028 | Probate court did not err in denying appellant's motion to remove appellee as executor of the estate. The executor followed the unambiguous directions of the decedent's will and did not have a conflict of interest with the estate, the probate court did not err in interpreting the intent of the will, the probate court did not err by not holding a hearing on the matter, and the executor properly sought to sell devised estate property to satisfy the debts of the estate where the value of undevised property alone was woefully inadequate to satisfy the debts. | Piper | Madison |
8/10/2026
|
8/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3060 |
|
In re H.C.
| CA2026-03-007 | The juvenile court did not err in granting permanent custody to the Department of Job and Family Services. There was no indication in the record that mother's case plan and visitation with child were terminated until the court's decision granting the agency permanent custody and finding mother's objections to the amended case plan moot. Mother therefore suffered no harm or prejudice from the amended case plan before the court ruled on it. In addition, the juvenile court made the required findings before granting custody to the Agency, and mother did not request the trial court lay out its reasoning in more detail with written findings of fact or conclusions of law. | Siebert | Brown |
8/10/2026
|
8/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3058 |
|
State v. Hill
| CA2026-02-005 | The trial court did not err in sentencing appellant to more than the mandatory minimum 30 consecutive days in jail required by R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(c) for appellant's third Operating a Vehicle Impaired ("OVI") offense within the preceding six years of when the subject offense occurred where the trial court properly considered and then applied the necessary misdemeanor sentencing statutes, including R.C. 2929.21(B), when fashioning appellant's sentence. | Piper | Preble |
8/10/2026
|
8/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3061 |
|
State v. Dhimal
| CA2026-01-005 | Trial court did not err in ordering the involuntary medication of a person committed as incompetent to stand trial without appointing an independent psychiatrist on its own initiative, where the committed person, who was represented by counsel and present at the hearing, never requested such an evaluation. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to request an independent psychiatric evaluation, where the decision was reasonable trial strategy and no prejudice was shown. | M. Powell | Butler |
8/10/2026
|
8/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3059 |
|
Doemeny v. Doemeny
| CA2026-02-019 | Trial court did not err in finding that a rental property and the parties' 2023 joint income tax refund were marital property and not husband's separate property, and in calculating husband's spousal support obligation without considering the change in tax law regarding the deductibility of spousal support from the payor's income. The trial court's classification of husband's bank account as marital property and not his separate property is reversed and remanded for further proceedings because the trial court did not provide any reasoning or analysis or reference any evidence in support of its decision. | M. Powell | Butler |
8/4/2026
|
8/4/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3007 |
|