Case law

Bitounis v. Interactive Brokers, L.L.C.

2026 Ohio 2268 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 18, 2026

. {¶ 4} Antonas was not registered as an investment adviser with the SEC and did not qualify for an exemption from registration. … Once the account was established, IB performed standard brokerage functions.

State v. Spirko

59 Ohio St. 3d 1 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 10, 1991

Clearly, defendant has not followed App. … Although the defendant was offered an agreement in this case, no part of the agreement discussed immunity as to these charges.

City of Cleveland v. Trzebuckowski

85 Ohio St. 3d 524 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1999

Defendant does not assert that minors gather at billiard halls as “members of any organized association” or to “ ‘take positions on public questions,’ ” activities clearly protected by the First Amendment. … Likewise, meeting one’s friends at a billiard hall “qualifies neither as a form of ‘intimate association’ nor as a form of ‘expressive association’ * * *.” Id. at 25 , 109 S.Ct. at 1595 , 104 L.Ed.2d at 26 .

State ex rel. Brill v. Lorain Cty. Bd. of Elections

2024 Ohio 4990 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 16, 2024

On July 31, the board certified that relators’ petition contained enough signatures to qualify for placement on the November 5 general- election ballot. … After the board of elections determined that the petitions had enough signatures to qualify for the ballot, the municipal clerk refused to certify the petitions Id. at ¶ 9.

State v. Farris

109 Ohio St. 3d 519 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 12, 2006

, is sufficient to establish probable cause to search a motor vehicle” without a warrant. … The court clearly rejected the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine as a basis for exclusion.

Fisher v. Hasenjager

116 Ohio St. 3d 53 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 25, 2007

In 2003, the parties entered into a shared-parenting arrangement, in which parental rights and responsibilities were shared equally, and a detailed visitation schedule was established. … Fisher at ¶ 35. {¶ 9} The court of appeals then examined the definition of “terms” in R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(b) to determine whether a change in the residential parent and legal custodian of a child qualified as a “term” of a

Guerrieri v. Maxwell

174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 40 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1962

The fact that he may have committed two crimes gives him no immunity from prosecution of either.” … It is unnecessary to pass on this contention inasmuch as the journal entry of the court clearly shows that the court did not resentence him but simply ordered the previously imposed sentence into execution.

Brown v. Huber

80 Ohio St. (N.S.) 183 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1909

We think the rule upon this subject, as clearly established by the authorities is, that when the action is in equity to enforce a restrictive covenant controlling the use or enjoyment of land, the vital question is not whether … The rule upon this subject, generally adopted and followed by the courts of this country, is, we think, correctly stated in Kerr on Injunctions (2 ed.), page 356: “If the right at law under the covenant is clearly established

Doe v. Shaffer

90 Ohio St. 3d 388 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2000

the various parties, including negligent hiring, transmission of a communicable sexually transmitted disease, fraud, and sexual molestation.3 During the pendency of this suit, Doe died of complications related to acquired immune … method of analyzing this issue in cases with the factual setting and insurance policy provisions involved * * * would deal with each act on its own merits and recognize that employers who make negligent hiring decisions clearly

Theobald v. Fugman

64 Ohio St. (N.S.) 473 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 7, 1901

is regarded as a natural right, inhering in the ownership of property, or as resting wholly on these ancient statutes, it is entirely clear that the right thus created is of a. high order, not to be denied or materially qualified … establishes.

State v. Dean

127 Ohio St. 3d 140 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 26, 2010

I think that’s unethical behavior; and if it’s established that you did that, you’ll be held accountable.” … Moreover, this case clearly went beyond the normal disputes that sometimes arise between counsel and the trial judge during trial.

Farrier v. Connor

12 Ohio St. 3d 219 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 1, 1984

This clearly does not include any of the benefits paid to appellant. … Code,” and that these statutory provisions of the United States Code clearly establish benefits “provided by act of the congress of the United States * * First, the record contains no evidence that Marjorie Farrier ever received

DiCenzo v. A-Best Products Co.

120 Ohio St. 3d 149 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 22, 2008

The court held that the answers to three questions determine whether a decision should apply prospectively only: (1) does the decision establish a new principle of law that was not clearly foreshadowed? … Clearly, Temple addressed an issue of first impression that had not been foreshadowed in prior cases. 2.

State ex rel. Baker v. Coast to Coast Manpower, L.L.C.

129 Ohio St. 3d 138 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2011

. {¶ 28} Over the years, this court repeatedly has been faced with the question whether intraocular implants that mitigate eye injuries qualify as corrective. See, e.g., State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. … He clearly exceeds the 25 percent threshold. If Baker’s lens implant were treated as corrective, therefore, we would compensate him for total loss of sight.

Jones v. Brown

11 Ohio St. (N.S.) 601 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1860

not control the legal effect of the note, it may be used to explain the intent and object of the payment of sixty dollars in addition to the year’s interest, and to show that such payment was the consideration for, and established … to the legal effect of the acts done, no agreement which bound the creditor to give time, from year to year, or for an indefinite time, what afterward occurred can only be regarded as a voluntary indulgence, which very clearly

State ex rel. New Carlisle v. Clark Cty. Bd. of Elections

178 Ohio St. 3d 289 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 11, 2025

Mandamus Claim Against the Board {¶ 10} To obtain a writ of mandamus against the board, New Carlisle must establish by clear and convincing evidence (1) a clear legal right to have the income-tax levy placed on the … ordinance” when it means to do so and that because the General Assembly did not use that phrase in R.C. 718.04(C)(2), only an ordinance “actually passed by the legislative authority of the municipal corporation” will suffice to qualify

State v. Gilliam

1994 Ohio 348 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 2, 1994

In the present case, we initially find that Moore's statement falls within an established hearsay exception as a statement against interest, Evid.R. 804(B)(3). … Finally, Evid.R. 804(B)(3) requires that corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement before the statement against interest becomes admissible.

State v. McKelton (Slip Opinion)

148 Ohio St. 3d 261 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 13, 2016

As a result, the trial court erred by admitting Crystal’s statements.3 {¶ 139} Even so, McKelton cannot establish that but for this error, the outcome of the trial “clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. … And other photographs at trial clearly confirmed McKelton’s identity without depicting his tattoos.

Freedom Road Found. v. Ohio Dept. of Liquor Control

80 Ohio St. 3d 202 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1997

directing their activities would itself be “conducting” the tip ticket scheme, and the scheme of chance would not be solely “conducted by a charitable organization” as required by R.C. 2915.02(D)(1), nor would the permit holder qualify … Clearly, however, the trial court refused to grant Freedom Road the declaratory judgment it sought, that being a declaration that “its charitable fundraising activities are in compliance with R.C. 2915.02 and Regulation 53

Heidle v. Baldwin

118 Ohio St. 375 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1928

It is admitted that South Wayne avenue carried a street railroad, and it was therefore clearly a main thoroughfare. … The right of way establishes precedence only when rights might otherwise be evenly balanced.