|
|
Warrensville Hts. v. Preston
| 115661 | Traffic ticket; Ohio Traffic Rules; Ohio Uniform Traffic Ticket; bill of particulars; double jeopardy; frivolous appeal; manifest weight of the evidence; sufficiency of the evidence; stop sign; expired plates. Appellant’s convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence; therefore, they were also supported by sufficient evidence. Appellant was not entitled to a bill of particulars under the Ohio Traffic Rules. We decline to consider appellant’s constitutional challenge because it was not raised at the trial-court level. Double jeopardy is inapplicable because appellant was convicted of expired plates in several jurisdictions on different dates. Appellant was warned that she may be declared a vexatious litigator if she continues to file frivolous appeals. | Ryan | Cuyahoga |
9/24/2026
|
9/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3730 |
|
Ridgeway v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
| 115881 | Summary judgment; declaratory judgment; remedial; confidential; mortgage; promissory note; contract; loan agreement; Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of bank on plaintiff’s claim for judgment declaring that plaintiff is entitled to confidential loan information of a third party where the loan was secured by a mortgage encumbering the plaintiff’s property and plaintiff’s property rights were affected by the loan. | E.T. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
9/24/2026
|
9/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3731 |
|
State v. Sanders
| 115957 | Manifest weight of the evidence; self-defense. Appellant’s conviction for felonious assault causing serious physical harm was supported by the manifest weight of the evidence, where appellant claimed self-defense, thereby admitting the essential elements of the offense, the jury heard both the appellant’s and victim’s versions of events and the jury found the victim’s testimony more credible. | Groves | Cuyahoga |
9/24/2026
|
9/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3732 |
|
Cleveland Hts. v. Henry
| 115980 | Abuse of discretion; continuance; trial; timeliness. Affirmed. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the trial court’s decision denying a last minute, oral motion to continue the trial was an abuse of discretion because a motion for continuance must be timely filed and not disrupt the proceedings. In general, a motion filed the day of trial is considered to be filed in bad faith and solely for the purposes of delay. | S. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
9/24/2026
|
9/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3733 |
|
State v. Hess
| 116099 | R.C. 2953.08(G)(2); R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); consecutive sentences; failure to comply; R.C. 2921.331. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering prison term imposed for appellant’s strangulation conviction to run consecutively to his prison terms for prior convictions, including for failure to comply. Failure-to-comply conviction was required to run consecutively by statute. As for other consecutive sentences, the trial court made the required findings, which were not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. | Forbes | Cuyahoga |
9/24/2026
|
9/24/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3734 |
|