|
|
LVNV Funding, L.L.C. v. Smith
| E-25-044 | Trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief where movant does not demonstrate a meritorious defense. Presumption of proper service by certified mail is not rebutted where service was sent to defendant’s address on her credit account, was signed for, and where defendant filed an appearance to contest jurisdiction three weeks later. Judgment entered after notice of appeal not subject to review where appellant did not amend her notice of appeal to include it. | Sulek | Erie |
4/17/2026
|
4/17/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1404 |
|
State v. Shabaa
| L-25-00159, L-25-00160 | Per Mayle, J., trial court violated R.C. 2981.12(G) when it permitted funds forfeited by consent judgment in civil forfeiture proceeding to be applied against fines imposed in related criminal case. Trial court lacked authority to permit funds forfeited under terms of plea agreement to be applied to fines imposed in criminal case where plea agreement provided that forfeited funds would be disbursed to State and police department. | Mayle | Lucas |
4/17/2026
|
4/17/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1403 |
|
State v. Pontious
| F-25-003, F-25-004, F-25-005 | Per Mayle, J., trial court did not err by denying appellant’s motion for new trial because error in admitting annotated signature sheet was harmless, State’s failure to list witness on witness list was not willful, and appellant was not prejudiced by State’s failure to disclose original signature sheet. Appellant’s statements were admissible without probation officer giving Miranda warnings. Appellant’s convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and not against weight of the evidence. | Mayle | Fulton |
4/14/2026
|
4/15/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1367 |
|
In re E.D.-P.
| L-25-00246 | Finding that mother did not demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that she could parent her child notwithstanding having permanent custody of other children awarded to Lucas County Children Services ("LCCS") is not against the manifest weight of the evidence where there has been no change in the circumstances that warranted the removal of her older children. | Sulek | Lucas |
4/9/2026
|
4/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1294 |
|
State v. Wilson
| L-25-00130 | Sulek, J., Trial court’s order imposing prison term of seven to ten-and-a-half years was not excessive despite the State’s recommendation of a seven-year prison term pursuant to a plea agreement. The trial court informed appellant during plea hearing that it was required to impose a minimum and a maximum sentence pursuant to Reagan Tokes law. | Sulek | Lucas |
4/8/2026
|
4/8/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1166 |
|
In re J.J.
| L-25-00257, L-25-00258 | Judge Duhart. Permanent custody complaint. Domestic violence. Substance abuse. Housing issues. Parental rights involuntarily terminated to other children. | Duhart | Lucas |
4/8/2026
|
4/8/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1269 |
|
State v. Betz
| OT-25-030 | Judge Duhart. Judgment affirmed. Trial court had discretion under R.C. 2929.13(B) to sentence appellant to prison and his arguments regarding mitigation were not reviewable by the appellate court. | Duhart | Ottawa |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1158 |
|
In re E.W.
| OT-25-025 | Duhart. Child custody. Mother. Grandmother. | Duhart | Ottawa |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1164 |
|
State v. Brewer
| L-25-00232 | Per Osowik, J., There is no abuse of discretion by the trial court in the imposition of a maximum sentence in a misdemeanor offense when an offender whose conduct and response to prior sanctions for prior offenses demonstrate that the imposition of the longest jail term is necessary to deter the offender from committing a future criminal offense. R.C.2929.22(C). | Osowik | Lucas |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1159 |
|
State v. Koonce
| L-25-00060 | Per Mayle, J., trial court did not err by declining to give a cautionary instruction under R.C. 2933.81(D) regarding appellant’s unrecorded custodial interview. The Ohio Constitution does not require custodial interviews to be recorded. The trial court did not commit plain error by including a flight instruction or in formatting its jury instructions or verdict forms. Appellant’s counsel was not ineffective. Appellant’s convictions are supported by the weight of the evidence. | Mayle | Lucas |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1165 |
|
State ex rel. Dula v. Walz
| L-26-00059 | Trial court does not have a legal duty to rule on a discovery motion in a criminal case after the defendant enters a no-contest plea and is found guilty and sentenced. | Sulek | Lucas |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1167 |
|
Sullinger v. Sullinger
| L-25-00169 | Zmuda, J., writing for the majority reverses the judgment only as it relates to the time provided by the trial court for compliance with the modified spousal support order; trial court adopted magistrate’s decision after two years, without addressing the result of the passage of time on the magistrate’s schedule for paying spousal support and arrearage, requiring reversal and remand to the trial court to address payment schedule for modified spousal support order. | Zmuda | Lucas |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1171 |
|
Lashaway v. Lashaway
| WM-25-009, WM-25-010 | Per Duhart, J., trial court’s findings of fraud, undue influence, and unjust enrichment are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Trial court had discretion to give appraiser’s testimony whatever weight it chose. Appellant breached the trust, so trial court properly rescinded deed. Trial court’s interpretation of trust is consistent with the plain language of the trust. Trial court did not abuse its discretion when fashioning remedy for breach of trust. | Duhart | Williams |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1168 |
|
State v. Schafer
| WM-25-018 | Mayle. Appellant’s conviction for failure to comply was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court’s forfeiture order is ordered vacated because the jury did not make a finding of forfeiture pursuant to R.C. Chapter 2981. | Mayle | Williams |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1172 |
|
State v. Doolittle
| WD-25-009 | Duhart. Not guilty by reason of insanity. Waiver of jury trial. | Duhart | Wood |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1160 |
|
Gerkens v. Gerkens
| WD-25-056 | Where trial court finds that an equal division of property is equitable, it abuses its discretion by overruling objection to magistrate decision and finding that the value of the marital property is the stipulated value, but where the record shows that the stipulated value was based on a mutual mistake, resulting in the husband being required to pay an extra $120,000. Trial court erred in finding that husband’s mother’s $40,000 payment towards marital liabilities was not debt that should be accounted for. | Sulek | Wood |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1161 |
|
State v. Heath
| WD-25-035 | No trial court sentencing error. Judgment affirmed. Osowik | Osowik | Wood |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1163 |
|
State v. Schooner
| WD-25-044 | Per Osowik, J., Appeal is dismissed. The merits of appellant’s assignments cannot be addressed because the completion of his jail-time sanction renders his appeal moot. | Osowik | Wood |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1169 |
|
State v. O'Brien
| WD-23-055 | Trial court loses jurisdiction to act once an appeal has been taken and decided, unless the action pertains to an issue that is not inconsistent with the jurisdiction of the appellate court to review, affirm, modify, or reverse the appealed judgment. Crim.R. 32.1 motion is inconsistent with the appellate court’s jurisdiction to affirm the conviction premised upon that plea. The trial court, therefore, lacks jurisdiction to consider a Crim.R. 32.1 motion after the conviction has been affirmed on appeal. | Sulek | Wood |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1173 |
|
U.S. Asset Mgt., Inc. v. Howansky
| WD-25-043 | Zmuda, J., writing for the majority affirms the judgment for plaintiff in collection action where defendant did not object to the supporting evidence of debt and amount owed, proffered in support of summary judgment. | Zmuda | Wood |
3/31/2026
|
3/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1170 |
|
State v. Gonzales
| WD-25-024 & WD-25-034 | There was no plain error in standby counsel’s participation in sidebar conferences, the court did not err in excluding exhibits and evidence, and the conviction for failure to register was supported by sufficient evidence. | Sulek | Wood |
3/27/2026
|
3/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1079 |
|
State v. Livingston
| WD-25-036 | Where no objection was raised, appellant failed to establish plain error where, in contravention of the plea agreement, the State’s comments at sentencing were an attempt to influence his sentence. | Sulek | Wood |
3/27/2026
|
3/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1080 |
|
State v. Beardsley
| WD-25-038 | Duhart. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed. The convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court, in sentencing separately for counts 1 and 2 did not err simply because the parties agreed that they should merge. | Duhart | Wood |
3/27/2026
|
3/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1083 |
|
State v. Mayes
| L-25-00098 | Per Mayle, J., defendant waived error respecting admission of excited utterances by stating that he had “no objection” when State sought to admit the evidence. State presented evidence of “knowingly” where defendant fired eight shots in residential neighborhood in middle of afternoon while children played outside. Convictions not against manifest weight of evidence. On State’s cross-appeal, sentence contrary to law where wrong subsection cited and court failed to impose maximum indefinite prison term. | Mayle | Lucas |
3/27/2026
|
3/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1081 |
|
State v. Sweet
| L-25-00111 | Per Sulek, J., court cannot say that record clearly and convincingly does not support trial court’s finding that consecutive sentences were not disproportionate to seriousness of appellant’s conduct and danger he poses to public. Appellant did not demonstrate reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have entered guilty plea. Record is devoid of evidence from which court can conclude that appellant’s conduct did not support elevated degrees of offenses. | Sulek | Lucas |
3/27/2026
|
3/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1082 |
|
TT419, Inc. v. JOGA Holdings Corp.
| L-25-00135 | Osowik. The trial court properly determined that landlord/appellee JOGA made a reasonable effort to re-rent the premises following tenant/appellant TT419’s breach of the parties’ lease agreement. Appellants have failed to show that JOGA failed to make reasonable efforts to mitigate the damages resulting from appellant’s breach of the lease agreement. | Osowik | Lucas |
3/24/2026
|
3/25/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1022 |
|
Huss v. Huss
| OT-25-021 | Duhart. Divorce. Settlement agreement. Meeting of the minds. | Duhart | Ottawa |
3/24/2026
|
3/25/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1021 |
|
State v. Henderson
| S-24-017, S-24-019, S-24-020 | Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms trial court’s judgment convicting appellant of possession and conveyance as supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Possession and conveyance do not merge for sentencing purposes, and appellant failed to explain why trial counsel’s failure to seek admission of certain exhibits was ineffective assistance of counsel. | Zmuda | Sandusky |
3/24/2026
|
3/25/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1020 |
|
McDonald v. Foos
| WD-24-069 | Any error in the court’s exclusion of the decedent’s statements under Evid.R. 804(B)(5) was harmless. The trial court properly instructed the jury on prevention of performance. | Sulek | Wood |
3/24/2026
|
3/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1004 |
|
State v. Thompson
| WD-25-008, WD-25-042 | Per Osowik, J., Appeal is dismissed. The merits of appellant’s assignments cannot be addressed because the completion of her jail-time sanction renders her appeal moot. | Osowik | Wood |
3/24/2026
|
3/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-1005 |
|
State v. Reams
| WD-25-049 | Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, reverses appellant’s conviction for [hit and skip] | Zmuda | Wood |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-960 |
|
State ex rel. Yost v. Keegan Ents., Ltd.
| S-25-020; S-25-021 | Sulek, J., affirms the trial court’s order imposing civil penalties and injunctive relief for open dumping of solid waste and public nuisance as not against the weight of evidence and supported by sufficient evidence. Appellants failed to file complete transcripts. Appellants’ claim of judicial bias was forfeited by failure to file affidavit of disqualification with Ohio Supreme Court. | Sulek | Sandusky |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-961 |
|
State v. Elston
| L-25-00053 | Per Mayle, J., trial court erroneously imposed consecutive sentences as if they were mandatory under R.C. 2921.331(D). Because consecutive sentences were not mandatory, court was not required to inform appellant at plea hearing of the possibility of imposing consecutive sentences. Trial court’s inclusion of all possible terms of postrelease control in sentencing entry did not reflect notice it gave at sentencing hearing. Court previously dismissed count so did not need to include it in sentencing entry. | Mayle | Lucas |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-958 |
|
State v. Hills
| L-25-00037 | Per Mayle, J., although Hills claims that his plea was not knowingly or intelligently made because the trial court failed to inform him of potential consequences, our review of the record establishes that the trial court complied with the constitutional and procedural safeguards set out in Crim.R. 11 to ensure that his plea was knowingly and intelligently entered. As such, we find Hills’ assignment of error not well-taken and affirm the Judgement Entry of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas. | Mayle | Lucas |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-959 |
|
State v. Wright
| L-25-00102, L-25-00103 | Per Osowik, J., Appeal is dismissed. The merits of appellant’s assignments cannot be addressed because the completion of his prison sentence sanction renders his appeal moot. | Osowik | Lucas |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-962 |
|
State v. Cowgill
| F-25-001 | Per Mayle, J., there is sufficient evidence to convict defendant-appellant, Michael Cowgill of rape. Additionally, the conviction is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Accordingly, the judgment of the Fulton County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. | Mayle | Fulton |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-957 |
|
Vanderveer v. Ohio Assn. of Pub. School Emp.
| F-25-007 | Per Mayle, J., although framed as contract claims, plaintiff’s complaint alleges conduct that, if proven, constitutes an unfair labor practice specifically enumerated in R.C. 4117.11. State Employee Relations Board ("SERB") has exclusive jurisdiction over her claims. Plaintiff has not been deprived of a forum in which to bring her claims. R.C. Chapter 4117 vests SERB with jurisdiction in the first instance and redress may be sought in the courts depending on SERB’s disposition of her claims. | Mayle | Fulton |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-964 |
|
Town v. Sidoti
| E-25-041 | Per Mayle, J., appellant cannot show that negligent misrepresentation applies to his claim because he was not involved in a business transaction. Assuming that real estate sale was a business transaction, trial court did not abuse its discretion by adopting magistrate’s finding that appellant failed to prove justifiable reliance on statement appellee made in real estate listing document. | Mayle | Erie |
3/20/2026
|
3/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-963 |
|
State ex rel. Ames v. Vermilion Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn.
| E-25-018 | Per Osowik, J., the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment for respondent, Vermillion Local School District Board of Education and denying relator, Brian Ames summary judgment. Additionally, it did not err in denying Ames’ motion for leave to file a surreply. Accordingly, we affirm the May 14, 2025 Judgment Entry of the Erie County Court of Common Pleas. | Osowik | Erie |
3/17/2026
|
3/17/2026
| 2026-Ohio-893 |
|
State v. McQuin
| L-25-00129 | Judge Duhart, consecutive sentences, R.C. 2929.13(B), post-release control notification. | Duhart | Lucas |
3/17/2026
|
3/17/2026
| 2026-Ohio-894 |
|
State v. Roper
| L-25-00067 | Trial court properly granted appellant’s motion to enforce settlement agreement in collection action upon finding that the mutually agreed upon terms were reasonably certain and clear, and as such, a contract was created. Judgment affirmed. | Osowik | Lucas |
3/13/2026
|
3/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-863 |
|
State v. Wang
| WD-25-014 | Judge Duhart. Trial court complied with Crim.R. 11(C) and plea was made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. Trial court improperly imposed post-release control at sentencing hearing. | Duhart | Wood |
3/13/2026
|
3/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-861 |
|
State v. Street
| WD-25-039 | Per Mayle, J., trial court did not commit plain error when it failed to merge convictions of theft of cash and receiving stolen property, a credit card. Although cash and credit card were stolen at same time when defendant took victim’s bag, his later use of credit card caused separate harm. For these same reasons, trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to argue merger. | Mayle | Wood |
3/13/2026
|
3/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-864 |
|
State v. Oliver
| L-24-1247 | Per Mayle, J., trial court lacked jurisdiction to try appellant’s case without a jury because appellant properly demanded a jury trial for her petty offense but there is no evidence in the record that she waived her right to a jury trial in a signed writing that was filed, made part of the record, and made in open court, as required by R.C. 2945.05. | Mayle | Lucas |
3/10/2026
|
3/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-803 |
|
State v. Kynard
| L-25-00038 | Per Osowik, J., trial court judgment is reversed on the imposition of a consecutive sentence to another unsentenced case in another court. Remanded for the limited purpose of post release control notification. | Osowik | Lucas |
3/6/2026
|
3/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-758 |
|
State v. Trotter
| L-25-00168 | Per Osowik, J., trial court judgment is affirmed. Plea of No Contest was voluntarily and knowingly made. Under oath, appellant stated that he was satisfied with the representation of his lawyer. | Osowik | Lucas |
3/6/2026
|
3/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-759 |
|
Finn v. Rutherford
| L-25-00221 | Judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellant failed to present objections to the magistrate decision and did not argue plain error. Appellant did not file a transcript and a reviewing court is unable to evaluate the merits of appellant’s arguments. | Osowik | Lucas |
3/6/2026
|
3/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-760 |
|
State v. Lanier
| OT-25-017, OT-25-018 | Per Osowik, J., trial court judgment is affirmed. This court cannot find that the record does not clearly and convincingly support the trial court’s findings | Osowik | Lucas |
3/6/2026
|
3/6/2026
| 2026-Ohio-762 |
|
In re L.R.
| L-25-00227 | No juvenile court error terminating appellant-mother’s parental rights to the minor children and granting permanent custody to appellee. Judgments affirmed. Osowik | Osowik | Lucas |
3/5/2026
|
3/5/2026
| 2026-Ohio-746 |
|
State v. Hernandez
| L-24-1232 | Per Mayle, J., the jury’s finding that the State disproved one of the elements of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt is not against the manifest weight of the evidence | Mayle | Lucas |
2/27/2026
|
2/27/2026
| 2026-Ohio-679 |
|