|
| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
Dayton Human Relations Council v. King
| 30497 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it extended the deadline for appellees to file a record of the proceedings before the magistrate in connection with their objections to the magistrate’s decision. There was good cause for the extension, which was authorized under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iii). Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-668 |
|
State v. Fletcher
| 30458 | Appellant’s argument that the trial court erred in taking her guilty plea without properly advising her about merger should have been raised on direct appeal from her original judgment of conviction, as opposed to after her resentencing upon the revocation of her community control sanctions. Res judicata applies. Judgment affirmed. | Huffman | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-669 |
|
In re E.H.
| 30592 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion or violate mother’s due process rights when it held the permanent custody hearing concerning her child in her absence due to her incarceration. Nor did the court abuse its discretion or violate mother’s due process rights when it denied her motion to continue the permanent custody hearing. The trial court did not abuse its discretion or violate mother’s due process rights when it denied her motions for legal custody to a relative or a nonrelative because, among other reasons, neither proposed legal custodian signed a statement of understanding for legal custody that contained the statutorily required provisions of R.C. 2151.353(A)(3)(a) through (d). | Hanseman | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-670 |
|
McManus v. Foster
| 30591 | On appeal from default judgment on a tax foreclosure claim, appellant cannot raise issues and present evidence that he did not previously provide to the trial court. Trial court did not deny appellant adequate time and opportunity to respond to the complaint. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-671 |
|
State v. Reid-Payne
| 30554 | The trial court did not err in dismissing the indictment against appellee that alleged one count of carrying a concealed weapon. R.C. 2923.12(A)(2) is unconstitutional as applied to appellee, a 20-year-old who did not have a concealed handgun license. State v. Matosky, 2025-Ohio-5658 (2d Dist.). Judgment affirmed. | Lewis | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-672 |
|
U.S. Bank v. Ballard
| 30570 | The issue of appellee’s standing to bring its foreclosure action against appellants was previously determined to be moot, and therefore this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the issue. The trial court did not err in finding that the charges sought by appellee in its foreclosure action against appellants were not Fair Debt Collections Practice Act ("FDCPA") violations. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-673 |
|
Weber v. Weber
| 30629 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling appellant’s motion for relief from judgment, which was brought under Civ.R. 60(B)(4). The parties’ separation agreement did not provide for continuing jurisdiction over the case or modification of the agreement other than for matters involving the minor children, such as custody and parenting time. Although appellant asked the court to vacate the dissolution decree rather than modify it, she did not claim that the basis for the agreement was invalid due to grounds upon which relief could be granted, such as mutual mistake or fraud. Instead, appellant claimed relief under Civ.R. 60(B)(4), which was not allowed under prevailing authority. Judgment affirmed. | Hanseman | Montgomery |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-674 |
|
State v. Dorsey
| 30435 | The trial court did not err in dismissing a carrying concealed weapons charge. R.C. 2923.12(A)(2) is unconstitutional as applied to appellee, a 19-year-old who did not have a concealed handgun license. See State v. Matosky, 2025-Ohio-5658 (2d Dist.). Judgment affirmed, and the cause is remanded to proceed with the remaining counts in the indictment. | Huffman | Montgomery |
2/20/2026
|
2/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-581 |
|
In re K.R.H.
| 30587 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it modified father’s parenting time with his son to the Standard Order of Parenting Time. The standard order remedied the parties’ shared concern regarding the consistency of parenting time, and the trial court appropriately considered the statutory best interest factors of R.C. 3109.051(D). The trial court abused its discretion when it limited father’s parenting time with his daughter to therapy sessions only, with modifications within the therapist’s sole discretion. The record does not reflect that this would be in the child’s best interest. Judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/20/2026
|
2/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-583 |
|
R.S. v. Rindler
| 30543 | Because the civil stalking protection order expired while the appeal was pending, the appeal is moot. Appeal dismissed. | Huffman | Montgomery |
2/20/2026
|
2/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-584 |
|
State v. Trigg
| 30510 | The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s petition for postconviction relief and overruling his motion for leave to file a delayed new-trial motion without holding an evidentiary hearing on the petition or motion. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
2/20/2026
|
2/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-585 |
|
State v. Bankston
| 2025-CA-43 | The trial court erred in imposing a four-month term of incarceration for appellee’s fifth-degree felony conviction. The sentence is contrary to law because it falls outside the statutory range for the offense. The trial court possesses jurisdiction to impose a lawful sentence on remand despite appellee’s completion of his four-month sentence. Judgment partially reversed, sentence vacated, and case remanded for resentencing. | Tucker | Greene |
2/20/2026
|
2/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-580 |
|
In re J.H.
| 2025-CA-40, 2025-CA-41 | Appellant’s appeals from maximum sentences imposed for contempt findings are moot. The imposed sentences have been completed, and appellant failed to provide evidence from which an inference can be drawn that he will suffer some collateral disability or loss of civil rights from the judgments. Appeals dismissed. | Hanseman | Greene |
2/20/2026
|
2/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-582 |
|
State v. Dominguez-Olivia
| 2025-CA-19 | Appellant’s convictions for failure to comply with an order or signal of a police officer and assault were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The evidence at trial supported the conclusions that appellant’s operation of his vehicle caused a substantial risk of serious physical harm to persons or property and that he kicked the trooper voluntarily. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Greene |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-484 |
|
State v. Bailey
| 30429 | Appellant was convicted of assault based on punching the victim at a party. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the State to present an 11-second video of the assault as it was properly authenticated, was not precluded by the best evidence rule, was relevant, and was not unduly prejudicial. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the trial court should have permitted appellant to present evidence of specific prior interactions between the appellant and the victim as proof of the appellant’s state of mind for purposes of a self-defense claim, the trial court did not commit reversible error. The evidence demonstrated that appellant was the initial aggressor when the assault occurred. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-481 |
|
Discover Bank v. Hinders
| 30571 | The trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of appellee-creditor on its action to collect the credit card debt of appellant-debtor. Evidentiary documents submitted to support creditor’s motion for summary judgment were not properly authenticated, so genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment remained. Judgment reversed and remanded. | Huffman | Montgomery |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-483 |
|
State v. Fitchpatrick
| 30574, 30575, 30576 | The record does not clearly and convincingly fail to support the trial court’s consecutive-sentence findings. Judgments affirmed. | Lewis | Montgomery |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-485 |
|
State v. Harris
| 30426 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s untimely motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. Appellant failed to seek leave to file his untimely motion and did not show that he was unavoidably prevented from filing a timely motion for a new trial or discovering the new evidence. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-486 |
|
Oasis Home Buyers, L.L.C. v. Estate of Thomas
| 30524 | Appellant entered into a contract to purchase real estate, but before closing, the seller died. Upon the seller’s death, appellant was an estate creditor and was required to present its claim for specific performance of the purchase contract in accordance with the presentment requirements of R.C. 2117.06. Appellant did not properly present its claim against the estate in accordance with the statute, so the trial court correctly granted summary judgment to appellees. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-487 |
|
State v. Veal
| 30373 | The trial court abused its discretion by ordering appellant to pay restitution where the evidence did not establish that appellant’s act of driving without a license was a direct and proximate cause of any economic loss. Judgment reversed in part and affirmed in part. | Lewis | Montgomery |
2/13/2026
|
2/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-488 |
|
State v. Pigg
| 2025-CA-44 | The trial court erred in sentencing appellee to serve a four-month jail term for fifth-degree felony aggravated possession of drugs. Absent the imposition of community control sanctions, the sentence is below the prescribed statutory range for fifth-degree felonies, and by imposing a sentence contrary to law, the trial court committed plain error. Appellee’s completion of the four-month jail sentence did not render the appeal moot because the appeal was timely filed by the State, and the State has an effective remedy through the resentencing of appellee on remand. Judgment vacated as to appellee’s sentence and remanded for resentencing. (Huffman, J., concurring.) | Hanseman | Greene |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-375 |
|
State v. Humphreys
| 2025-CA-9 | Appellant’s statutory and constitutional rights to a speedy trial were not violated. The trial court did not commit plain error by failing to remove two jurors for cause on grounds of bias, and appellant’s trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the jurors in question. Appellant’s convictions for attempted rape, kidnapping, and strangulation were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court violated Evid.R. 404(B) by allowing the State to present other-acts evidence of appellant’s prior juvenile adjudication for attempted rape. That error was harmless as to appellant’s convictions for kidnapping and strangulation, but not as to appellant’s attempted rape conviction. Because the other-acts evidence error was reversible error as to appellant’s attempted rape conviction, the sexually violent predator specification attached to that conviction must be reversed. The issue of whether appellant was guilty of the sexual motivation specification attached to his kidnapping offense should have been determined by the jury as opposed to the trial court; however, that error was invited by appellant and did not amount to plain error. The sexually violent predator specification attached to appellant’s kidnapping offense was supported by sufficient evidence and was not based on inadmissible hearsay. Appellant’s claim that the trial court erred by failing to merge his attempted rape and kidnapping convictions at sentencing is moot by virtue of the attempted rape conviction being reversed. Appellant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial due to the cumulative error committed during his trial lacks merit. Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part. | Hanseman | Clark |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-373 |
|
State v. Smith
| 2025-CA-41 | Appellant contends that she received ineffective assistance of counsel because her attorney did not inform her that upon her guilty pleas, she forfeited her right to appeal the trial court’s motion to suppress decision. Because the appellate record does not include the discussions between appellant and counsel concerning the guilty plea and the record is otherwise silent on the issue, a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel is not possible. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Clark |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-378 |
|
State v. Adams
| 30520 & 30527 | Appellant’s convictions for failure to stop at a railroad grade crossing and endangering children are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court properly applied R.C. 4511.63 in convicting appellant of failure to stop at a railroad grade crossing. Judgment affirmed. | Huffman | Montgomery |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-372 |
|
In re C.C.
| 30542 | The trial court abused its discretion by denying the State’s motion for access to recorded phone calls at a juvenile detention center where the juvenile failed to raise any expectation of privacy in the recorded phone calls and the trial court found that it was in the interest of public safety to locate the stolen firearms. Judgment reversed to the extent that it overruled the State’s motion but affirmed in all other respects. | Lewis | Montgomery |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-374 |
|
State v. Skirvin
| 30462 | Appellant’s convictions for three counts of felonious assault on a peace officer and one count of aggravated possession of drugs were based on sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The jury reasonably concluded that appellant knowingly attempted to cause physical harm when he shot in the direction of officers parked along the highway median, that appellant was conscious and had acted voluntarily when he drove his pickup truck into an occupied police cruiser, and that he knowingly possessed the methamphetamine found in his truck. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to provide, sua sponte, a “blackout” jury instruction and in denying appellant’s request for an instruction on aggravated menacing as to the shooting. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Montgomery |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-376 |
|
State v. Slaughter
| 30589 | Appellant entered a valid guilty plea under Crim.R. 11, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by overruling his motion to withdraw it. Appellant’s sentence is contrary to law, however, insofar as the trial court disapproved shock incarceration or placement in an intensive program prison without providing factual reasons for its disapproval. Judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part, and case remanded for resentencing. | Tucker | Montgomery |
2/6/2026
|
2/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-377 |
|
Bright v. Mao
| 2025-CA-32 | Res judicata precludes appellant from arguing that the judgment on her legal separation, parts of which were incorporated into the divorce judgment on appeal in this case, was void where she failed to prosecute her appeal in the separation action. The trial court’s alleged denial of appellant’s post-judgment motion requesting a transcript of the final divorce hearing at the State’s expense is not properly before this court. Judgment affirmed. | Lewis | Greene |
1/30/2026
|
1/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-286 |
|
State v. Wagner
| 2025-CA-33 | Appellant’s sentence to community control sanctions is not contrary to law, and the court complied with R.C. 2929.11 in imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. | Huffman | Greene |
1/30/2026
|
1/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-289 |
|
Beavers v. State
| 30540 | The trial court erred by making credibility determinations in its decision granting summary judgment in favor of the State on appellant’s wrongful imprisonment claim. Judgment reversed. | Lewis | Montgomery |
1/30/2026
|
1/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-285 |
|
State v. Finley
| 30505 | In this appeal concerning the trial court’s decision overruling appellant’s motion to dismiss his indictment, Appellant forfeited his only argument on appeal by not raising it in the trial court. Judgment affirmed. | Lewis | Montgomery |
1/30/2026
|
1/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-287 |
|
In re A.S.
| 30567 | The trial court did not err in awarding the appellee, a public children services agency, permanent custody of appellant’s child without finding that the child could not or should not be placed with either parent within a reasonable time. The child had been in appellee’s temporary custody for 12 or more months of a 22-month period, so by statute, the trial court was not required to render a finding on the child’s placement with either parent. Likewise, the trial court did not err in failing to make a factual finding that would have supported a determination regarding the child not being placed with either parent within a reasonable time. Because the trial court was not obligated to make a finding regarding the child’s placement with either parent, the alleged absence of admissible evidence to support such a finding is immaterial. Finally, appellant cannot demonstrate entitlement to reunification with her child absent any reversible error in the trial court’s determination that awarding permanent custody to appellee was in the child’s best interest. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
1/30/2026
|
1/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-288 |
|
State v. Bell
| 30545 | Appellant’s motion to preserve biological evidence is not necessary or justiciable, and it is barred by res judicata. Judgment affirmed. | Huffman | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-202 |
|
State v. Coleman
| 30479 | The trial court erred in overruling appellant’s motion to suppress because the arresting officer lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion to stop appellant for a red-light violation. Appellant’s argument regarding her ALS appeal—which the trial court never ruled on—is moot because upon reversal and remand for the suppression issue, this matter is restored to its pre-plea status. Judgment reversed and remanded. | Huffman | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-203 |
|
Credit Serv. Internatl. v. Armstrong
| 30616 | The trial court did not err by failing to provide analysis in support of its summary judgment ruling in favor of appellee. The record does not reflect that the trial court did anything to preclude appellant from conducting discovery or being heard in opposition to summary judgment. A Dayton ordinance limiting the late fees that a landlord may charge had no applicability to appellant’s lease of an apartment in Moraine. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-204 |
|
Geisenfeld v. Geisenfeld
| 30487 | The trial court did not err in finding that appellant had fraudulently induced appellee to sign a settlement agreement. The agreement was ambiguous, and therefore the court was allowed to hear extrinsic evidence. Upon consideration of that evidence, the court found that appellant acted maliciously and violated her fiduciary duty by failing to disclose that the items for which appellee had bargained under the agreement were wholly meaningless, worthless, or non-existent. No error occurred in that regard. The court also did not abuse its discretion in awarding damages and attorney fees to appellee. Judgment affirmed. | Hanseman | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-205 |
|
State v. Johnson
| 30536 | The trial court did not err in overruling appellant’s motion to dismiss his indictment on statutory and constitutional speedy trial grounds. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-206 |
|
McManus v. Villalva
| 30551 | Appellant’s claim that he is redeeming real estate subject to foreclosure proceedings is unrelated to the judgment on appeal, which granted foreclosure on the subject property. Although appellant may redeem the property by paying delinquent taxes after foreclosure but prior to confirmation of a sheriff’s sale, the post-foreclosure redemption process is separate from the foreclosure order itself. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-207 |
|
Reilly v. Rastegar
| 30464 | The trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of appellee-hospital on appellant’s respondeat superior claim in her medical negligence action. Expert testimony is not required in a negligence action involving conduct within the common knowledge and experience of jurors, which includes a hospital staff member failing to follow orders of a physician. Genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment remained where there was evidence that defendant-surgeon had instructed defendant-surgical scrub technician not to place a particular instrument on his surgical tray, and the surgical scrub technician failed to follow the order, ultimately handing the wrong instrument to the surgeon during appellant’s surgery. The surgeon used the instrument, and appellant was injured. Judgment reversed and remanded. | Huffman | Montgomery |
1/23/2026
|
1/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-208 |
|
Discover Bank v. Hanson
| 30515 | The records submitted in support of appellee bank’s motion for summary judgment were properly authenticated as business records and appropriately considered by the trial court. The records established appellee’s entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the balance appellant owed on a delinquent credit card account. Judgment affirmed. | Lewis | Montgomery |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-140 |
|
State v. Edwards
| 30448 | Appellant’s conviction for violating a protection order was based on sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The evidence supported the conclusions that appellant was informed of the protection order and that he was served with it before the alleged violation. The trial court appropriately acted within its discretion to credit the complainant’s testimony that appellant was the helmeted motorcyclist who followed and gestured toward the complainant. Judgment affirmed. | Hanseman | Montgomery |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-141 |
|
In re M.A.
| 30586 | The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Mother’s objections to a magistrate’s decision that found her infant son to be an abused child. The court did not err in admitting a drug screen record. Counsel for Mother stipulated to the authenticity of the record, and it was authenticated pursuant to R.C. 2317.422(A). Mother’s child was a per se abused child given that at birth, a drug screen of the child revealed the presence of cocaine. Judgment affirmed. | Huffman | Montgomery |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-142 |
|
State v. Smith
| 30538 | On remand, the trial court correctly advised appellant of his presumed duty to enroll in the violent offender database and his right to file a motion to rebut the presumption. The trial court did not err when it overruled appellant’s motion to rebut the presumed duty to enroll in the violent offender database. Because appellant’s convictions were affirmed on his first appeal, the trial court was without jurisdiction to consider appellant’s motions requesting vacation of his guilty plea. Appellant’s cumulative error argument is without merit. Finally, the trial court did not resentence appellant. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-144 |
|
State v. Murphy
| 2024-CA-20 | The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s motion to suppress the drugs found in her vehicle following an alert by a drug-detecting dog. The testimony of the K-9 handler established that the dog was trained and certified in the detection of methamphetamine prior to the traffic stop. Appellant’s conviction for aggravated possession of drugs (methamphetamine) was based on sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed. | Epley | Darke |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-143 |
|
State v. Wa Tenza
| 2025-CA-7 | Appellant’s conviction for assault, a first-degree misdemeanor, was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Although appellant produced evidence that he acted in self-defense, the jury reasonably credited the State’s evidence disproving the self-defense claim. Judgment affirmed. | Hanseman | Greene |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-145 |
|
State v. Clutter
| 2025-CA-14 | The trial court did not err in imposing a 12-month prison sentence upon revoking community control because appellant’s violations were not “technical violations,” as provided by R.C. 2929.15(E). The trial court was not required to abide by the parties’ joint sentencing recommendation in sentencing appellant. Judgment affirmed. | Lewis | Champaign |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-139 |
|
State v. Brandon
| 2025-CA-38 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling appellant’s presentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Judgment affirmed. | Tucker | Clark |
1/9/2026
|
1/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-48 |
|
State v. Sweeney
| 2023-CA-58 | In this reopened appeal, the trial court committed plain error by admitting the laboratory report identifying the controlled substance allegedly possessed by appellant because the procedural requirements of R.C. 2925.51 to admit the report had not been satisfied. Appellant’s claim regarding the sufficiency of the evidence lacks merit because all evidence admitted at trial, including improperly admitted evidence, must be considered in reviewing such a claim. Based on the resolution of appellant’s claim regarding the lab report, his claim regarding the ineffective assistance of trial counsel is moot. The inadmissible lab report was essential to appellant’s aggravated possession of drugs conviction, so prior appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to challenge the report on appellant’s direct appeal. Prior appellate judgment vacated. Trial court judgment reversed and remanded. (Huffman, J., dissenting.) | Hanseman | Clark |
1/9/2026
|
1/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-57 |
|
State v. Harrell
| 2024-CA-62 | Appellant’s conviction for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity is supported by sufficient evidence. Appellant was not prejudiced by the State’s amendment to the indictment. Judgment affirmed. | Lewis | Clark |
1/9/2026
|
1/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-54 |
|
State v. Uchyn
| 2025-CA-4 | By failing to renew his Crim.R. 29 motion at the close of evidence, appellant waived his argument that his conviction for murder of the female victim is not supported by sufficient evidence. Even considering the merits, sufficient evidence supports appellant’s murder conviction. Appellant’s conviction for murder of the male victim is supported by sufficient evidence and is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed. | Huffman | Darke |
1/9/2026
|
1/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-58 |
|