|
|
State v. Luu
| 116076, 116077 | Res judicata; postsentence motion to withdraw guilty plea; Crim.R. 32.1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant’s second postsentence motion to withdraw his guilty pleas. Appellant’s claims could have been raised in a direct appeal or were addressed in his first postsentence motion to withdraw. We decline to address appellant’s argument relative to Ohio’s gun laws because appellant cited no authority to support his claim. | Ryan | Cuyahoga |
10/15/2026
|
10/15/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4055 |
|
Williams v. Ripich
| 115807 | Civ.R. 58(B); App.R. 4(A)(3); failure of clerk to issue service of judgment entry; discovery order; App.R. 16(A)(7); fraud upon the court; contempt; judicial bias; attorney fees; pro se litigant. Affirmed. Appellant’s pro se arguments are largely unsupported with legal authority, and the authority provided deals with the denial of a Civ.R. 60(B) motion even though the appellant is challenging the merits of the final appealable order because of the tolling under App.R. 4(A)(3). Further, the appellant’s attempt to appeal a decision effectively holding a motion for contempt in abeyance is beyond this court’s jurisdiction. | S. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
10/15/2026
|
10/15/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4053 |
|
Lynch v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Auth.
| 116114 | Political subdivision immunity; R.C. 2744.02; three-tier analysis; summary judgment; negligence; genuine issues of material fact. Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of its motion for summary judgment alleging it was entitled to immunity from appellee’s negligence claim. Appellant’s first assignment of error argued the trial court erred and the case should be remanded because the trial court’s journal entry did not state what evidence it looked at and the ground it based its decision on in denying summary judgment. This assignment of error is overruled because we have stated clearly the trial court has no obligation to explain its denial of summary judgment. In its second assignment of error appellant argues that appellee cannot establish its bus driver was negligent as a matter of law. A review of the evidence submitted for summary judgment by appellant does not establish that appellant is entitled to summary judgment on this issue. Further, even assuming arguendo that it did submit sufficient evidence, appellee submitted evidence to establish there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the driver breached his duty of care by abruptly braking. As such summary judgment regarding appellant’s immunity was properly denied. Both assignments of error are overruled. | E.A. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
10/15/2026
|
10/15/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4057 |
|
Alkayali v. Case W. Res. Univ.
| 115926 | R.C. 2744.01; political-subdivision immunity; private university; police department; corporate and body politic; motion to dismiss; R.C. 1713.50; final, appealable order. The appeal is dismissed for lack of a final, appealable order because the order denying the motion to dismiss did not deny a political subdivision or an employee of a political subdivision the benefit of an alleged immunity from liability. | Clary | Cuyahoga |
10/15/2026
|
10/15/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4054 |
|
State v. Molina
| 114849 | Guilty plea; effect of guilty plea; inquiry; motion for new counsel; motion to withdraw guilty plea. Defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily pleaded guilty even though the court did not explicitly state the effect of a guilty plea where record showed that the defendant understood that a guilty plea constituted an admission that she committed the acts to which she pleaded guilty. The trial court properly denied defendant’s request for new counsel after court inquired into her reasons for requesting new counsel and discovered she merely disagreed with counsel’s advice. Trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea where the record showed she knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily pleaded guilty. | E.T. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
10/15/2026
|
10/15/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4050 |
|