| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
Robertson v. Park
| CA2024-09-115 | Grandmother appeals order granting domestic violence civil protection order ("DVCPO") prohibiting contact with granddaughter. Granddaughter experienced suicidal thoughts under grandmother's care. Civ.R. 65.1, not Civ.R. 53 applies in DVCPO hearings and does not require specificity in objections. Social worker who conducted psychosocial assessment on granddaughter could offer opinion as to the cause of the granddaughter's mental health issues. Civ.R 65.1 governs discovery in DVCPO proceedings and does not require exchange of expert reports prior to the full hearing. Grant of DVCPO supported by evidence that Grandmother caused granddaughter to suffer mental injury rendering her an "abused child" under the DVCPO statute. | Byrne | Butler |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-388 |
|
State v. Bryant
| CA2025-05-050 | Trial court erred in granting motion to suppress where driver failed to signal continuously during last 100 feet before turning as required by ordinance. Turn-signal requirement is absolute and not conditioned on traffic conditions or safety concerns. WITH CONCURRING OPINION | M. Powell | Butler |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-389 |
|
State v. Hopson
| CA2025-06-061 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-390 |
|
State v. King
| CA2025-06-064 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-391 |
|
State v. Waver
| CA2025-08-089 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-392 |
|
State v. McCollum
| CA2025-07-019 | Appellant's conviction resulting from a jury finding him guilty of felonious assault, discharging a firearm on a public roadway, and improper handling of a firearm while in a motor vehicle was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where there existed overwhelming competent and credible evidence in the record establishing appellant as the individual who fired multiple shots at the victim during a road-rage incident while both he and the victim were traveling northbound on a local two-lane freeway. | Piper | Fayette |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-393 |
|
State v. Hopkins
| CA2025-04-020 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Preble |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-395 |
|
State v. Simms
| CA2025-06-043 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Warren |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-396 |
|
Abdulhakov v. Panzeca
| CA2025-07-050 | The municipal court abused its discretion in dismissing a plaintiff's case with prejudice for lack of prosecution under the court's local rules where the plaintiff prosecuted the case, appearing before a magistrate and presenting evidence on behalf of his conversion claim, which arose following a dispute over legal fees. | Hendrickson | Warren |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-397 |
|
Via v. Boyle
| CA2025-04-005 | Trial court did not violate mother's First Amendment rights by terminating shared parenting where decision rested on mother's failure to communicate and cooperate with father about unilateral changes affecting child, not on content of mother's religious beliefs. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in imputing annual income to mother for child support where mother voluntarily quit employment to pursue self-sufficient lifestyle with new husband and made no job search efforts. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in relying on guardian ad litem's report where GAL failed to physically visit mother's home because Superintendence Rule 48 creates only administrative directives, not enforceable procedural rights. | M. Powell | Preble |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-310 |
|
State v. Jones
| CA2025-05-031 | The trial court erred in violation of the appellant's rights under the Confrontation Clause by admitting the victim's cell phone records without prior authentication by a custodian or other qualified witness. Due to the State's failure to authenticate the records as a business record, it is impossible to determine whether they are nontestimonial. However, any error in the trial court's admission of the cell phone records was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where, even when excluding the improperly admitted cell phone records, overwhelming evidence of the appellant's guilt remained. | Hendrickson | Warren |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-311 |
|
State v. Ward
| CA2025-04-034 | The defendant's convictions for strangulation, abduction, and rape were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence and testimony presented at trial did not preclude the jury from finding the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. | Siebert | Butler |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-305 |
|
Motes v. Motes
| CA2025-05-047 | Reviewing courts will presume the trial court performed its duty to independently review a Magistrate's Decision. The party asserting error bears the burden of affirmatively demonstrating the trial court's failure to perform its duty of independent analysis. In this case, Father has not satisfied this burden. The trial court expressly stated in its decision that it conducted an independent review of all factual and legal issues addressed by the magistrate in ruling on Mother's objections. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in modifying the parenting time order. Contrary to Father's position, Mother was not required to show a change in circumstances. The court was only required to consider the statutory factors in R.C. 3109.051(D), with the child's best interest as the guiding principle. However, there is merit to Father's argument regarding the court's treatment of Mother's work schedule. | Siebert | Butler |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-307 |
|
State v. Spottedhorse
| CA2025-06-062 | Defendant's 8 to 12-year indefinite prison term sentence was supported by the record and not contrary to law. Despite the defendant's limited criminal history and words of support from his family members as to the defendant's character, the trial court weighed that against the fact that the victim lost his life. Ohio precedent expressly forbids the substitution of the appeal court's judgment (or that of the defendant) for that of the trial court's when weighing the relevant sentencing factors. | Siebert | Butler |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-308 |
|
Reynolds v. Reynolds
| CA2025-07-071 | The domestic relations court's decisions to deny appellant's request for spousal support, reject appellant's proposed shared parenting plan, and award appellant with less than equal parenting time with his two unemancipated children were not arbitrary, unreasonable, or unconscionable so as to constitute an abuse of discretion where appellant's arguments established nothing more than his disagreement with the domestic relations court's decisions and the weight that the domestic relations court gave the enumerated statutory factors the court was required to consider. | Piper | Butler |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-309 |
|
Meranda v. Meranda
| CA2025-05-009 | Trial court did not err in awarding Husband the entirety of winery property and business. Wife failed to prove that any appreciation in the property's value was attributable to any renovations or contributions she made. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding Husband the entirety of the winery business as compensation for Wife's misconduct, which caused the loss of product and damage to the winery's vines and equipment. | Piper | Brown |
1/26/2026
|
1/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-221 |
|
State v. Kepler
| CA2025-04-026 | The trial court properly denied the appellant’s motion to suppress. Officers lawfully conducted a search incident to arrest after observing the appellant operating a vehicle without a functioning rear license plate light and displaying clear signs of alcohol impairment. Appellant's conviction for improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Appellant's arguments to the contrary are not supported by the record and the jury did not lose its way in finding appellant guilty. | Siebert | Clinton |
1/26/2026
|
1/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-223 |
|
Booth v. Lazzara
| CA2025-05-038 | The trial court did not err in applying R.C. 5122.34 to the plaintiff's claims where each of the allegations concerned a mental health professional's assistance in the hospitalization or discharge of a person subject to hospitalization pursuant to R.C. 5122.01(B)(3). The plain language of R.C. 5122.34 applies to such claims. The trial court did not err in awarding summary judgment to the defendant-physician where he presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie showing that he acted in good faith in his treatment and discharge of the patient, and the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to rebut that showing. WITH DISSENTING OPINION. | Hendrickson | Warren |
1/26/2026
|
1/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-225 |
|
State v. Toler
| CA2025-06-063 | The trial court committed no error in accepting the defendant's guilty plea for aggravated possession of drugs. The trial court was not required under Crim. R. 11 to notify the defendant—who was not then serving postrelease control for another offense—that if he committed another felony while on postrelease control for the aggravated possession offense, the court could terminate the postrelease control and impose an additional, consecutive prison term to that of the subsequently committed felony. | Siebert | Butler |
1/26/2026
|
1/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-222 |
|
State v. Brooks
| CA2025-06-018 | The trial court did not err by sentencing appellant to serve a mandatory minimum of 10 years in prison after pleading guilty to one count of first-degree felony possession of a fentanyl-related compound where the trial court's sentencing decision was not contrary to law under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) because the trial court considered all relevant statutory factors outlined in R.C. 2929.11 before issuing its sentencing decision, properly imposed postrelease control, and sentenced appellant within the permissible statutory range for the offense. | Piper | Madison |
1/26/2026
|
1/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-224 |
|
State v. Janosky
| CA2025-03-008 | Appellant's 36-month sentence for failing to comply with the order or signal of a police officer was not clearly and convincingly contrary to law where the court considered the principles and purposes of felony sentencing under R.C. 2929.11, considered the seriousness and recidivism factors set forth in R.C. 2929.12, properly imposed postrelease control, and sentenced appellant within the permissible statutory range for a third-degree felony. | Hendrickson | Madison |
1/20/2026
|
1/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-158 |
|
Moniz v. Moniz
| CA2025-03-015 | The trial court committed no error in its divorce decree. Husband failed to support and document that (1) a shared bank account was his separate property and (2) that wife "double dipped" on rental income when the trial court ordered husband to pay temporary spousal support to wife and later ordered rental income to be split between the parties. In addition, the trial court was not bound by the parties' "temporary agreed order" when determining the value of the husband's post-marital home (purchased with marital funds) for purposes of equitably dividing the parties' marital assets. Finally, wife's arguments on appeal provide no reason to question the domestic relation court's refusal to exercise jurisdiction over accounts made for the benefit of the parties’ (now adult) children. Such jurisdiction is typically exercised by probate courts. | Siebert | Warren |
1/20/2026
|
1/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-159 |
|
In re J.E.
| CA2025-08-090 | Trial court did not err in granting permanent custody of children to the Agency. The court appropriately declined to assign legal custody of the children to their maternal grandparents where no such motion for legal custody was filed and the grandparents supported a grant of permanent custody to the Agency. Father's trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance as she was not obligated to make futile requests or motions. | Piper | Butler |
1/16/2026
|
1/16/2026
| 2026-Ohio-137 |
|
State v. Jones
| CA2024-11-014 | Kidnapping counts associated with two of the victims suffered from duplicity in the charge because the State did not prove appellant committed a particularized act of kidnapping sufficient to verify jury unanimity. The State presented sufficient evidence to support multiple convictions for gross sexual imposition involving the victims. However, some counts are unsupported by the evidence and must be vacated. In addition, there was no plain error regarding the admission of victim-impact testimony. The testimony regarding the impact of the abuse was relevant to assess the victims' credibility and to rebut the defense theory. Moreover, the testimony was brief and not overly emotional or inflammatory. | Siebert | Brown |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-68 |
|
In re Estate of Ingalls
| CA2025-03-031 | A probate court has exceptionally broad discretion to determine the equitable distribution of the proceeds. In this case, the award did not amount to an abuse of discretion because the probate court did not act in a way that was unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable under current Ohio law. | Siebert | Butler |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-69 |
|
Henson v. Robinson
| CA2025-05-045 | The issuance of a DVCPO against father was improper because the trial court did not analyze whether the children were "endangered" or "abused" under Ohio law. The DVCPO proceedings were improperly treated as a substitute for child custody proceedings among quarreling parents. However, the trial court's denial of father's DVCPO petition against stepfather was not against the manifest weight of the evidence after presuming—with father not overcoming that presumption—the trial court's determination that one of the children's testimony against stepfather was not credible. | Siebert | Butler |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-70 |
|
State v. Lindhorst
| CA2025-01-006 | The State presented sufficient evidence to support the R.C. 2905.01(A)(1) conviction of a father for kidnapping his infant child. The short-form indictment and bill of particulars put the defendant on notice that the State was prosecuting him for removing the child from his truck to hold her as a shield. | M. Powell | Warren |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-72 |
|
Kane v. Kane
| CA2025-03-020 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining the amount of spousal support to award Wife. The trial court reasonably imputed income to Wife after consideration of evidence, including her education, work and life experience, and the income she historically earned, nor did the trial court abuse its direction with regard to the duration of said support. In addition, the trial court did not abuse its discretion with regard to the value of the marital residence, as both sides presented appraisal values separated by only $10,000. Even if evidence of a higher value existed, the trial court acted within its discretion by selecting its valuation of the property. | Siebert | Warren |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-73 |
|
In re E.D.L.
| CA2025-07-055; CA2025-07-056 | Best interests, permanent custody, kinship placement, legally secure placement | Byrne | Warren |
1/7/2026
|
1/7/2026
| 2026-Ohio-28 |
|
In re Adoption of K.C.K.
| CA2025-05-008 | Probate court did not err in finding that Mother had justifiable cause for failing to contact her child during the year preceding the filing of Stepmother's adoption petition. | Siebert | Fayette |
1/5/2026
|
1/5/2026
| 2026-Ohio-10 |
|
In re V.T.
| CA2025-07-017; CA2025-07-018 | Juvenile court did not err in terminating parental rights and granting permanent custody where parents failed to substantially remedy concerns causing removal and could not provide legally secure permanent placement. | M. Powell | Fayette |
1/5/2026
|
1/5/2026
| 2026-Ohio-11 |