Case law

Karches v. City of Cincinnati

38 Ohio St. 3d 12 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 20, 1988

Even though the present uses of these properties were established prior to the passage of the new RF-1 regulations, all are conforming uses. The California neighborhood has many existing recreational establishments. … The evidence of unreasonableness or arbitrariness must be clearly and satisfactorily shown.

In re C.P.

131 Ohio St. 3d 513 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 3, 2012

Since you are a public registry qualified juvenile offender registrant you are also required to register in person with the sheriff of the county in which you establish a place of education immediately … I acknowledge, however, that Williams must be regarded as established precedent on the issues it resolved.

Nestle R&D Center, Inc. v. Levin

122 Ohio St. 3d 22 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 30, 2009

Because the taxpayer must prove the illegal, erroneous, or excessive character of a payment in order to qualify for a refund, a refund claim does not accrue until all circumstances are present that cause the payment to be … Limbach (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 102, 104, 554 N.E.2d 1310 (when seeking tax reduction, taxpayer must show that statute “clearly express[es] the exemption”).

State v. Hill

73 Ohio St. 3d 433 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 30, 1995

Also, Hill did not establish that his cocaine addiction qualified as a mental disease or defect under R.C. 2929.04(B)(3). See State v. Cooey, 46 Ohio St.3d at 41, 544 N.E.2d at 919; State v. … Edwards established a bright-line rule that once an accused, in custody, asks for a lawyer, questioning must cease until his lawyer is present.

Doe v. Shaffer

90 Ohio St. 3d 388 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 20, 2000

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 … (N.D.Ill.1993), 819 F.Supp. 756, 760.7 Here, Interstate does not dispute that neither the Brothers nor the individual members of the Brothers against whom claims were brought qualify as insureds under the terms of the

City of Rocky River v. State Employment Relations Board

39 Ohio St. 3d 196 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 2, 1988

by the board, from a list of qualified persons maintained by the board.” … request a list of qualified conciliators from the American arbitration association and appoint therefrom.”

Houk v. Ross

34 Ohio St. 2d 77 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 2, 1973

That rule clearly indicates that the Court of Appeals has the authority to reverse a judgment or final order of a trial court and render the judgment or final order that the trial court should have rendered. … ‘More’ relates to amount, num- . her or quantity, and it is clear to us that the word ‘one’. qualifies ‘building,’ and that the sole purpose of this provision was to limit the number of the buildings which were to be located

State ex rel. Sartini v. Yost

96 Ohio St. 3d 37 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 10, 2002

On September 5, 1997, the Attorney General issued Opinion No. 97-042, in which she concluded that a “recreational vehicle, as defined in R.C. 4501.01(Q), that is altered in such a way that it qualifies as a fixture under … Although the auditor clearly should have made her request for outside counsel a year and a half ago, when that option was offered to her, the court, in the exercise of its discretion, finds that her belated request should

Van Camp v. Board of Education of the Inc. of Logan

9 Ohio St. (N.S.) 406 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1859

That the legislature intended that the word “ colored,” in the law of 1853, should bear its ■ordinary and popular signification, is also apparent from the fact that in section 5, of the law of 1849, they qualified and restricted … On the 7th of March, 1848, the legislature of this state passed the first law for the establishment of separate schools for colored • children.

Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. CompManagement, Inc.

104 Ohio St. 3d 168 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 2004

Yet Goodman never held that appearances and practice before the Industrial Commission generally constitute the practice of law for which only attorneys are qualified. … Validity of the claim having been established, compensation is paid on the basis prescribed by the statutes, and the incident is closed. {¶ 68} “Since the inception of the Workmen’s Compensation Act it has been common practice

Crew 4 You, Inc. v. Wilkins

105 Ohio St. 3d 356 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 18, 2005

The Tax Commissioner’s findings “are presumptively valid, absent a demonstration that those findings are clearly unreasonable or unlawful.” Nusseibeh v. Zaino, 98 Ohio St.3d 292 , 2003-Ohio-855 , 784 N.E.2d 93, ¶ 10 . … Any claimed exemption from taxation must be strictly construed, and the taxpayer must affirmatively establish his or her right to the exemption. Campus Bus Serv. v.

McMullen v. Ohio State Univ. Hosp.

88 Ohio St. 3d 332 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 12, 2000

R.C. 2743.03 created the Court of Claims, vesting it with “exclusive, original jurisdiction of all civil actions against the state permitted by the waiver of immunity contained in section 2743.02 of the Revised Code.” … the probate court allocates the award among the beneficiaries, which is clearly in violation of Buchman and Sorrell. {¶ 50} It is not necessary to choose between these two options.

State Ex Rel. Robinson v. Industrial Commission

138 Ohio St. 3d 471 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 20, 2014

To qualify for temporary-total compensation, she was required to show that she was medically incapable of returning to her former position of employment and that it was her injury, rather than the fact that she was fired, … construct that is eroding Ohio’s constitutionally guaranteed no- fault system, and the majority’s decision takes the court further down the wrong path. {¶ 30} Ohio’s workers’ compensation system is a no-fault system established

Galt Alloys, Inc. v. KeyBank Natl. Assn.

85 Ohio St. 3d 353 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1999

The court noted that the defendants clearly had had an opportunity to oppose these motions. … 9  SUPREME COURT OF OHIO every foreclosure case, a constitutionally required element of due process, and resolve the certified issue with a qualified

State v. Perez

124 Ohio St. 3d 122 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 2, 2009

Little could see his face clearly by the streetlight overhead. … However, the evidence clearly established the existence of a course of conduct involving two intentional killings or attempts to kill. (See the discussion of Perez’s first proposition of law.)

Phipps v. Hope

16 Ohio St. (N.S.) 585 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1866

. - “ That said Joseph Hope died on the 12th of July, a. d. 1863, intestate, and the defendant, Robert Hope, is his adminintrator, he-^having been duly appointed and qualified, and is now acting as such. … They clearly are not, by-reason of their want of conformity to the provisions of the statute of wills.

Winters National Bank & Trust Co. v. Ross

169 Ohio St. (N.S.) 335 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1959

“No instrument authorizing a fiduciary therein named to serve without bond shall relieve a successor fiduciary from the necessity of giving bond, unless the instrument clearly evidences such intention. … In 1892, this section was re-enacted with minor amendments but in substantially the same form (see 89 Ohio Laws, 370), while at the same time the same general provisions as to testamentary trustees, established in 1865 (62

State ex rel. Papageorgiou v. Avalotis Corp.

2025 Ohio 5371 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 3, 2025

.) {¶ 36} Papageorgiou has not established that the conditions triggering the above-italicized language have been met. … CONCLUSION {¶ 37} For the reasons stated above, Papageorgiou has not established that he is entitled to relief in mandamus.

Richland County Bar Ass'n v. Brickley

97 Ohio St. 3d 285 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 4, 2002

B {¶ 4} Respondent violated DR 6-101(A)(3) by failing to file a Qualified Domestic Relations Order for a client after her divorce was finalized in December 1999. … excessive fee), 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(2), and 9-102(B)(4) (failing to promptly return client’s funds) after accepting $520 from a client to establish a guardianship for the client’s aunt.

McIntyre v. Hooks (Slip Opinion)

162 Ohio St. 3d 213 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 2, 2020

No. 86 (“H.B. 86”) had been enacted, and it established different maximum penalties for these offenses. … Here, because no de jure punishment had been “already imposed,” McIntyre qualified to be sentenced under H.B. 86.