|
| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
Ranazzi v. Fire Recovery USA, L.L.C.
| L-23-1024 | Osowik. Trial court did not err in granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment. The summary judgment affidavits complied with Civ.R. 56(E). Judgment affirmed. | Osowik | Lucas |
9/15/2023
|
9/15/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3281 |
|
Hoerig v. Bowling Green State Univ.
| WD-22-047 | Sulek, J. Complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from university’s Covid-19 vaccine and testing policies is moot where the policies have been voluntarily rescinded and there is no reasonable expectation that substantially similar policies will be reimposed. | Sulek | Wood |
9/8/2023
|
9/8/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3189 |
|
In re N.J.
| L-23-1114 | Following prior permanent custody terminations as to mother, the juvenile court’s award of permanent custody to the children’s services agency was supported by clear and convincing evidence. R.C. 2151.414(E)(11). Sulek, J. | Sulek | Lucas |
9/8/2023
|
9/8/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3190 |
|
State v. Lake
| L-22-1273, L-22-1274, L-22-1275, L-22-1276 | Sulek, J., writing for the majority, finds that appellant waived his challenge to prejudicial joinder through guilty plea and record supported imposition of consecutive sentences. Judgment affirmed. | Sulek | Lucas |
9/8/2023
|
9/8/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3191 |
|
Sallock v. Tillimon
| L-22-1241 | No trial court error for judgments denying appellant’s motion to dismiss, dismissing appellant’s cross-claim against appellees’ attorney, and awarding damages after a bench trial. Osowik. | Osowik | Lucas |
9/8/2023
|
9/8/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3193 |
|
Harding v. Ohio Real Estate Comm.
| L-23-1010 | Lower court judgment affirming a decision by Ohio Real Estate Commission to discipline a licensee for violating a provision of R.C. 4735.18 was affirmed where the lower court did not abuse its discretion in examining the record for reliable, probative, and substantial evidence and where the judgment was in accordance with the law. | Mayle | Lucas |
9/1/2023
|
9/6/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3138 |
|
State v. Ashford
| L-22-1296 & L-22-1299 | Zmuda. Judgment denying dismissal after mistrial affirmed where defendants consented by stating they had no objection to mistrial and selecting new trial date, and the record demonstrated no prosecutorial intent to provoke a mistrial; based on consent, manifest necessity to declare a mistrial not a consideration. | Zmuda | Lucas |
9/1/2023
|
9/6/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3139 |
|
Reid v. Reid
| OT-22-037 | Osowik - Trial court did not abuse its discretion in its calculation of spousal and child support or in denying husband’s motion to disqualify wife’s trial counsel. | Osowik | Ottawa |
9/1/2023
|
9/6/2023
| 2023-Ohio-3140 |
|
State v. Brooks
| L-22-1288, L-22-1289, L-22-1290 | Per Judge Mayle, J., affirmative conduct provided basis for defendant’s obstructing official business conviction and trial court’s factual findings were not against manifest weight of evidence. Given court’s factual finding that defendant was unaware that ranger attempted to stop her vehicle, defendant was not properly convicted under R.C. 2921.331(B), which requires operation of motor vehicle and the willful eluding or fleeing from a police officer after receiving a visible or audible signal to stop. | Mayle | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2978 |
|
State v. Johnson
| L-22-1306 | Duhart. Johnson’s motion to suppress was properly denied. Evidence adduced at the suppression hearing supports the conclusion that Archer possessed at least reasonable suspicion that that the vehicle was driven in violation of R.C. 4511.34. | Duhart | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2979 |
|
Castle CFD Group, L.L.C. v. Kinney
| L-22-1245 | Sulek. Trial court did not err in granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment, as appellants (1) waived any defense of payment, and (2) failed to provide any proper evidence showing that there is a genuine issue of material fact for trial. | Sulek | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2980 |
|
Loch v. Myers
| L-22-1153 | Duhart, P.J. Evidence of party’s conduct in prior foreclosure proceedings is relevant to questions of credibility and whether he properly exercised an option to purchase the same property in a subsequent transaction. Probative value is not substantially outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice where the evidence allowed the jury to logically conclude that the prior conduct made it more likely that the party was not credible and exercised the purchase option to delay losing control of the property. | Duhart | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2981 |
|
Liberty Aviation Museum, Inc. v. JRM Marine Consulting
| OT-22-053 | Trial court does not err in awarding attorneys’ fees under R.C. 2323.51 as sanction for frivolous conduct of plaintiff where the plaintiff continued to pursue claims that clearly were not warranted under existing law. R.C. 2323.51 does not impose a duty on a party seeking sanctions to mitigate damages, but the party may only recover attorney fees that were reasonably incurred. | Sulek | Ottawa |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2982 |
|
State v. Sprouse
| L-22-1230 | Sulek. The record clearly and convincingly supported appellant’s consecutive sentences. The trial court failed to properly impose postrelease control. | Sulek | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2983 |
|
State v. Barber
| L-22-1278 | Zmuda, J.: Appellant forfeited his arguments challenging the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 922(g) and R.C. 2923.16(B) by failing to raise the arguments in the trial court. Further, appellant failed to establish that the trial court committed plain error in applying those statutes. | Zmuda | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2991 |
|
Norton v. Norton
| L-22-1255 | Zmuda, J., writing for the majority finds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding spousal support to appellee. Trial court considered all necessary factors and appellant waived arguments related to allegedly deficient evidence in support of assigned errors. | Zmuda | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2992 |
|
State v. Skorich
| L-22-1233 | Judge Duhart, R.C. 2953.08, R.C. 2929.12 | Duhart | Lucas |
8/25/2023
|
8/25/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2993 |
|
In re Deran
| L-22-1254 | Trial court abuses its discretion in the denial of a petition for a certificate of qualification for employment where the trial court does not consider the statutory rebuttable presumption of eligibility under R.C. 2953.25(C)(5). | Sulek | Lucas |
8/18/2023
|
8/18/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2902 |
|
State v. Fenderson
| E-22-034 | Per Mayle, J, following guilty plea to R.C. 2903.04(A), trial court did not err in refusing to allow defendant to elicit testimony concerning inaccuracies in pre-sentence investigation or in considering undisclosed letter from victim’s mother. State did not have to identify predicate offense where defendant pled guilty. Trial court was not required to make findings to impose repeat violent offender sentence. S.B. 201 is not unconstitutional on its face. Trial court erred in failing to make notifications required by R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c). | Mayle | Erie |
8/18/2023
|
8/18/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2903 |
|
State v. Grubb
| OT-22-049 | Per Mayle, J, on challenge to trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences on six counts of unlawful sexual contact with 14-year-old girl, court made all necessary findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and record clearly and convincingly supports those findings. | Mayle | Ottawa |
8/18/2023
|
8/18/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2904 |
|
State v. Henning
| WD-22-046 | Judge Osowik. Witness is permitted to refresh her recollection using her own personal notes; a witness must be competent to testify by way of personal knowledge or expert qualifications; no constitutional right to offer unfettered testimony that is otherwise inadmissible under the rules of evidence. | Osowik | Wood |
8/18/2023
|
8/18/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2905 |
|
State v. Kline
| WM-22-008 | Appellant’s conviction for theft was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, where the record includes, among other evidence, an apology letter from appellant in which she admits to stealing the victim’s property. | Zmuda | Williams |
8/18/2023
|
8/18/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2906 |
|
In re A.L.
| L-23-1076 & L-23-1077 | Judge Duhart. Mother failed to remedy the condition which caused the child to be removed from the home. No-contact order between father and child. Mother failed to protect child. Evidence of mother’s on-going relationship and contact with father who sells and takes drugs, has firearms and was in gun battle with child present. Mother was dishonest and lacked commitment to children. | Duhart | Lucas |
8/16/2023
|
8/16/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2868 |
|
Pitts v. Heuberger
| OT-23-012 | Marsy’s Law, victim, R.C. 2930.01(H), private citizen complaint, R.C. 2935.09(D), R.C. 2505.02, prosecutor, R.C. 2935.01, R.C. 2930.01(E). Osowik, Mayle, Duhart | Osowik | Ottawa |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2794 |
|
Murphy v. Davis
| L-23-1079 | Judge Duhart, Magistrate Order, Objections, Time to file Transcript | Duhart | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2795 |
|
State v. Lofton
| L-22-1111 | No trial court error in accepting Alford guilty plea and convicting appellant of felonious assault, but error when imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed, in part, and reversed, in part. Osowik. | Osowik | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2796 |
|
Hill v. At Home Stores, L.L.C.
| L-22-1282 | In this premises liability action, summary judgment properly granted to home furnishing store where customer, who fell on top of shelving units, failed to show that the unit(s) were hazardous and, even if she had, customer also failed to show that store employees improperly constructed them or that store had actual or constructive knowledge of any defect. (OSOWIK). | Osowik | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2798 |
|
State v. Daniel
| L-22-1231 | Duhart. Motion to suppress photo array properly denied. Convictions supported by sufficient evidence and by manifest weight of the evidence. Trial court correctly declined to merge sentences for aggravated robbery and grand theft auto. Consecutive sentences were proper. | Duhart | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2800 |
|
Cook v. Cook
| L-23-1029 | Zmuda, J.: Appeal dismissed where the trial court’s order reinstating appellee’s claims and permitting amendment of appellee’s complaint was not a final appealable order under R.C. 2505.02. | Zmuda | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2801 |
|
State ex rel. Boyd v. Tone
| E-23-022 | Osowik. Sixteen years after his guilty plea and conviction for multiple felonies, defendant filed a complaint in prohibition, alleging the trial judge who presided over his criminal case failed to notify him during his plea colloquy of his constitutional right to compel process. Because the complaint raises a voidable error, that could have been raised on direct appeal, his collateral attack in prohibition is barred by res judicata. | Osowik | Erie |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2802 |
|
State v. Huebner
| L-22-1109 | Zmuda. Judgment reversed and matter remanded for new trial, where trial court erred and misapplied law in excluding defense expert under Evid.R. 403(A), and erred in limiting cross examination of mother regarding potential bias and motive to pursue false allegations, arising from custody dispute between the state’s witness and appellant. | Zmuda | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2803 |
|
Toledo v. AH & TQ, Inc.
| L-22-1280 | The trial court committed reversible error by issuing a permanent injunction prior to the expiration of the time period for appellant to file its answer to appellee’s complaint. | Zmuda | Lucas |
8/11/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2790 |
|
State ex rel. Tingler v. Winters
| OT-23-014 | Vexatious litigator’s petition for leave to file a mandamus petition to compel respondent to release grand jury transcript from a four-year old case that was dismissed with prejudice is frivolous and an abuse of process. | Sulek | Ottawa |
8/10/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2791 |
|
State ex rel. Tingler v. VanEerten
| OT-22-029 | Vexatious litigator’s petition for leave to file a Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment dismissing his mandamus petition is denied where the motion for relief from judgment does not demonstrate that the petitioner is entitled to relief for one of the grounds stated in Civ.R. 60(B)(1) through (5), and is therefore frivolous and an abuse of process. | Sulek | Ottawa |
8/10/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2792 |
|
Ottawa Cty. Prosecutor v. Tingler
| E-22-041 | Trial court did not err in denying motion to dismiss where the complaint alleged sufficient facts that, if true, supported a claim that the defendant should be declared a vexatious litigator. Sulek | Sulek | Erie |
8/10/2023
|
8/11/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2793 |
|
State v. Alexander
| L-22-1183 | Zmuda. Judgment affirmed where appellant failed to demonstrate prejudicial error by trial counsel, waived all but plain error regarding admission of exhibit, trial court’s refusal to give a requested jury instruction was within its sound discretion, and sentencing under Reagan Tokes law has been found constitutional. | Zmuda | Lucas |
8/4/2023
|
8/4/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2708 |
|
Crawford v. Bellevue Hosp.
| E-22-039 | Sulek. In a negligence/wrongful death action the trial court did not err in denying defendants’ motion to dismiss where the proper party was substituted, no prejudice was demonstrated, and following dismissal without prejudice in the original action, the action was refiled within one year. Summary judgment to defendants was proper where plaintiff failed to create an issue of fact was to whether defendants’ care and treatment of the decedent caused her death. | Sulek | Erie |
8/4/2023
|
8/4/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2709 |
|
State v. Leasure
| S-22-017 | Per Mayle, J., trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to appoint new trial counsel; neither appellant nor counsel demonstrated a breakdown of the relationship sufficient to jeopardize appellant’s right to effective assistance of counsel. Appellant did not show that trial counsel was ineffective. Trial court’s consecutive-sentence finding under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(b) is not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record; the evidence supported court’s finding of great or unusual harm. | Mayle | Sandusky |
8/4/2023
|
8/4/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2710 |
|
State ex rel. Thompson v. Gonzales
| L-23-1158 | Complaint for writs or prohibition and mandamus dismissed where relator alleged that respondents, common pleas judges, improperly exercised authority over his case. One of the respondents merely signed pretrial order on behalf of assigned judge. Another respondent was assigned relator's case after being elected to succeed the originally-assigned judge. | Mayle | Lucas |
7/31/2023
|
8/1/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2665 |
|
State v. Alliman
| OT-21-024 | Motion for reconsideration granted and trial court's judgment reversed, where trial court erred permitting the state to elicit expert testimony without first providing an expert report under Crim.R. 16(K). | Osowik | Ottawa |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2617 |
|
State v. Boyd
| E-22-044 & E-22-045 | Duhart. Appellant’s claims in his third and fourth attempts to withdraw guilty plea, filed 16 years after his conviction, are all barred by res judicata. | Duhart | Erie |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2618 |
|
State v. Combs
| L-22-1155 | A trial court’s denial of a pretrial motion to dismiss is proper when the indictment sufficiently alleged a criminal offense and the motion alleged that the state cannot prove all of the elements of the crime. An argument on appeal is moot when challenging the sufficiency of a conviction, following a no contest plea, based on an element that the state was not required to prove. | Sulek | Lucas |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2619 |
|
In re D.H.
| L-22-1210, L-23-1103, L-23-1104, L-23-1105, L-23-1106 | No juvenile court error when it denied appellant-mother’s motions for nunc pro tunc judgments to vacate judgments and to seal records. Judgments affirmed. Osowik | Osowik | Lucas |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2620 |
|
State v. Kleinheins
| OT-22-042, OT-22-043, OT-22-044, OT-22-045 | Judgment affirmed as to imposition of consecutive sentences, based on sufficiency of record to support the trial court’s findings, and reversed as to jail-time credit, with remand for the limited purpose of including the calculation of jail-time credit in the sentencing entry as required by R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(g)(i). Zmuda. | Zmuda | Ottawa |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2621 |
|
Knous v. Bauer
| H-22-011 | Judge Duhart, medical malpractice, motion for new trial on the basis that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Duhart | Huron |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2622 |
|
State v. Ortiz
| WD-22-055 | Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms the judgment of the trial court. Appellant violated the terms of his community control and trial court did not commit plain error in imposing sentence. | Zmuda | Wood |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2623 |
|
State v. Reynolds
| S-22-022 & S-22-023 | An appellate court cannot independently weigh the factors under R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12 when the trial court’s record reflects an analysis of those factors without extraneous considerations. | Sulek | Sandusky |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2624 |
|
State v. Townsend
| L-22-1214 | Judge Duhart, concession of error, costs of confinement and supervision | Duhart | Lucas |
7/28/2023
|
7/28/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2625 |
|
In re R.R.
| H-23-012 | No juvenile court error terminating appellant-mother’s parental rights to the minor child and granting permanent custody to appellee. Judgment affirmed. Osowik | Osowik | Huron |
7/26/2023
|
7/27/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2575 |
|
In re T.G.
| L-23-1073 | Mayle. Because there was clear and convincing evidence to support the juvenile court’s findings under R.C. 2151.414(E)(1), (4) and (10), the court’s determination—that the children could not, or should not, be placed with the mother or father within a reasonable time—was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. | Mayle | Lucas |
7/26/2023
|
7/27/2023
| 2023-Ohio-2576 |
|