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?
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.?
Citation:
   What is Citation?
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.
This search returned 142 rows. Rows per page: 
12345678910...>>
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Estate of Lewis v. Anderson 24AP-572The trial court properly denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment, which asserted immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6), because genuine issues of material fact remained as to whether defendant-appellant, a police officer, acted recklessly in discharging his weapon during an arrest.DingusFranklin 6/4/2026 6/4/2026 2026-Ohio-2096
State v. Stewart 25AP-134Judgment affirmed. The appellant’s conviction for assault under R.C. 2903.13(A) was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The record evidenced that appellant placed his hand on J.D.’s neck and fell to the ground with her while attempting to retrieve his keys, leaving fresh scratch marks. This evidence allowed the factfinder to reasonably determine that appellant knowingly tried to cause or attempted to cause physical harm to J.D. The jury did not lose its way or commit a manifest miscarriage of justice warranting reversal and a new trial. Affirm the judgment of the Franklin County Municipal Court.JamisonFranklin 6/4/2026 6/4/2026 2026-Ohio-2097
Lower v. Lower 25AP-607In this appeal arising out of an underlying will contest action, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. The trial court did not err in overruling appellant’s objections to the magistrate’s decision recommending that summary judgment be granted in favor of Donald Lower in both his individual capacity and his capacity as executor. Nor did the trial court err in permitting decedent’s physician to submit his affidavit testifying to Decedent’s testamentary capacity, or in failing to strike the affidavit of decedent’s attorney who drafted the will. Furthermore, the doctrine of cumulative error is not applicable in this matter. Finally, appellant’s claims that the trial court exhibited bias against him and/or engaged in judicial misconduct during the proceedings below lacks merit, and even if it did not so lack merit, his sole remedy was to file an affidavit of prejudice with the clerk of the Ohio Supreme Court pursuant to R.C. 2701.03, which he failed to do. Judgment affirmed.Beatty BluntFranklin 6/4/2026 6/4/2026 2026-Ohio-2098
In re T.S. 24AP-328; 24AP-701JUVENILE — DELINQUENCY — JUV.R. 40(D)(6) — ASSAULT — SUFFICIENCY — MANIFEST WEIGHT: The juvenile court did not err in failing to assign juvenile's delinquency case to another magistrate where nothing in the record undermined the general presumption that the assigned magistrate could and would separate information that may be considered from information that may not, or suggested the magistrate failed to do so in this case or was otherwise biased or prejudiced against the juvenile by reason of his participation in a prior contested hearing of another juvenile found delinquent for their involvement in the same incident. Juvenile’s delinquency adjudication for assault was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the delinquent juvenile admitted to repeatedly striking the victim, video evidence depicted the encounter, an eyewitness corroborated the victim's account, and the record does not demonstrate the trial court lost its way in crediting the testimony of the victim about the assault. Judgment affirmed.EdelsteinFranklin 6/2/2026 6/2/2026 2026-Ohio-2050
State v. Ball 24AP-662The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s motion to dismiss the having weapons while under disability charge. R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), as applied to appellant, is consistent with the nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation and does not violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Judgment affirmed.DingusFranklin 6/2/2026 6/2/2026 2026-Ohio-2051
12345678910...>>