Case law

Estates of Morgan v. Fairfield Family Counseling Ctr.

77 Ohio St. 3d 284 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1997

Chapter 5122 is not entitled to the immunity bestowed by R.C. 5122.34. {¶ 73} Accordingly, FFCC is not entitled to qualified immunity under the first sentence of R.C. 5122.34 although, as set forth infra, it is entitled … The court explained as follows: “The determinative factual issue is whether or not a qualified psychiatrist was actively supervising the care of the decedent. * * * “* * * “While this record establishes

Hall v. City of Youngstown

15 Ohio St. 2d 160 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 10, 1968

Plaintiff in this case admits the principle that a municipality in its capacity as a firefighter is immune from suit, but strongly urges that in its capacity as a provider1 of water it is not immune from suit. … It was clearly a trespass, and this court held that the city was amenable to suit.

State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Hughes

58 Ohio St. 3d 273 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 10, 1991

Therefore, only criminal liability need be immunized. Ullmann v. United States (1956), 350 U.S. 422 ; Piemonte v. United States (1961), 367 U.S. 556 . … However, even where the legislature has clearly expressed an intention to establish a civil penalty, a challenger may show that the purpose and effect of the statute are punitive and negate the legislature’s classification

City of Cincinnati v. Bawtenheimer

63 Ohio St. 3d 260 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1992

The DePaola court held that the ordinance provided use immunity as opposed to the transactional immunity afforded by R.C. 2945.44. … The court discussed the distinctions between the two types of immunities as follows: “Transactional immunity is that immunity which protects a witness from prosecution when he gives compelled testimony which may be incriminating

Miracle v. Ohio Dept. of Veterans Servs. (Slip Opinion)

2019 Ohio 3308 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 20, 2019

The General Assembly has spoken clearly: probationary employees do not enjoy the same rights and protections afforded to tenured civil servants. … Later in the motion, the state argued that even if R.C. 124.56 established a public policy, Miracle’s claim would fail on the jeopardy element.

White v. King (Slip Opinion)

147 Ohio St. 3d 74 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 3, 2016

The respondents answered and jointly moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Civ.R. 12(C). {¶ 6} The trial court determined that King, Feasel, O’Brien, and Dunbar had immunity and were entitled to judgment on the … To the contrary, it provides that any prearranged discussion can qualify as a meeting.

State ex rel. Altiere v. Trumbull County Board of Elections

65 Ohio St. 3d 164 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1992

For example, an otherwise qualified law enforcement officer who is a full-time volunteer might qualify under the statute. … The evidence establishes that Shaffer was and is a full-time industrial employee, who worked at various part-time law enforcement jobs from 1979 to 1990.

Campbell v. Burton

92 Ohio St. 3d 336 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2001

As individual employees of Fairborn, Mallonee and Clifton were also entitled to qualified immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6). … in connection with a governmental or proprietary function, the following defenses or immunities may be asserted to establish nonliability.”

City of Wooster v. Arbenz

116 Ohio St. 281 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1927

The facts in the instant case being within narrow range, and it being clearly shown that at the time of the collision between the automobile of Arbenz and the truck owned and operated by the city the two autos were on Bowman … Authorities may be found in abundance to establish the immunity from liability in the former class of cases, and to establish the liability in the latter class of cases.

Bridges v. National Engineering & Contracting Co.

49 Ohio St. 3d 108 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1990

Under such circumstances, the Ohio employer is clearly an “employer” within the meaning of R.C. 4123.01(B)(2)(a). … Chapter 4123, thus sacrificing the immunity from civil liability provided in R.C. 4123.74.

State Ex Rel. Ehring v. Bliss

155 Ohio St. 99 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1951

“We agree with the conclusion of the Court of Appeals that the declaration of candidacy of the relator was clearly not in accord with the mandatory provisions of Section 4785-71a, General Code, and that the refusal to accept … preceding an election shall have the right to vote at such election in the precinct from which he moved wherein his voting residence had been legally established.”

State v. Reiner

89 Ohio St. 3d 342 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 26, 2000

a grant of immunity. … Hoffman, the United States Supreme Court noted that, “if the witness, upon interposing his claim [of privilege], were required to prove the hazard [of incrimination] in the sense in which a claim is usually required to be established

Hahn v. Kotten

43 Ohio St. 2d 237 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 23, 1975

The difficulties with limiting the qualified privilege of defamation to actual malice have been pointed out by the fiOTnm.enta.tors. See Evans, Legal Immunity For Defamation, 24 Minn. L. Rev. 607 , 609-12. … U * # # “ * * # Once the existence of the privilege is establish *252 ed, the burden is upon the plaintiff to prove that it has been abused by excessive publication, by use of the occasion for ah improper purpose, or by lack

State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth

131 Ohio St. 3d 55 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 11, 2012

Because of the proximity of the March 6, 2012 primary election, Waters has established that he lacks an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State ex rel. Owens v. … The board of elections and its members neither abused their discretion nor clearly disregarded applicable law by deciding not to certify Waters’s candidacy.

Robb v. Chagrin Lagoons Yacht Club, Inc.

75 Ohio St. 3d 264 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 6, 1996

In December 1989, a dispute arose as to whether Faint was qualified to be elected Commodore again, because there was some concern as to whether Faint qualified for Class B membership. … Clearly, the trial court had no authority to order club members how to vote.

Stahl v. Currey

135 Ohio St. 253 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1939

The distinction between absence and excess of jurisdiction is clearly stated as follows in Clerk & Lindsell on Torts (9 Ed.) at page 700: “If on the facts before him a judge has no competence to deal with the matter at all … Indeed, much of the confusion in which the entire topic of judicial immunity is involved is due to a loose use of the term ‘jurisdiction.’

National Cash Register Co. v. Kosydar

35 Ohio St. 2d 166 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1973

exported are not enough, by themselves, to confer immunity from local taxation. … The record establishes that some machines have remained stored in the warehouse awaiting shipment for three years.

Hooven & Allison Co. v. Lindley

4 Ohio St. 3d 169 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1983

Although the Michelin court clearly felt no compunction in explicitly overruling Low v. … In Youngstown Sheet & Tube, supra, wherein guidelines for making such a calculation are established, Hooven I was explicitly distinguished.

Argabrite v. Neer

149 Ohio St. 3d 349 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 27, 2016

employees may assert to establish nonliability in a civil action for damages.” … any language that restricts the common-law development of the rule or otherwise “clearly supports” abrogating the rule.

State Ex Rel. Hoag v. Lucas County Board of Elections

125 Ohio St. 3d 49 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 13, 2010

The dispositive issue is whether Hoag has established that the board of elections abused its discretion or clearly disregarded applicable law by denying his protests based on lack of standing. {¶ 8} R.C. 3513.05 … Fornshell, 125 Ohio St.3d 1, 2010-Ohio-1175, __ N.E.2d __, ¶ 18. {¶ 13} Accordingly, Hoag did not meet his burden of establishing that the board of elections abused its discretion or clearly disregarded R.C. 3513.05