Case law

New York Frozen Foods, Inc. v. Bedford Hts. Income Tax Bd. of Rev. (Slip Opinion)

150 Ohio St. 3d 386 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2016

Such return shall be clearly marked “Amended.” … On this basis, the BTA *390 held that Frozen Foods’ amended return did not qualify as a change in the method of accounting.

State v. Jones

90 Ohio St. 3d 403 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 27, 2000

McDonough does not specialize in infectious diseases, his expertise in the area of elenched-fist or bite injuries *415 to hands made him well qualified to testify on this subject. … Since the trial court clearly instructed the jury in this manner, appellant’s twenty-fourth proposition is not well taken.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Karto

94 Ohio St. 3d 109 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 16, 2002

These individuals were qualified to decide the issues of whether respondent had abused his contempt power and whether his actions constituted judicial 2. … Under these circumstances, we do not find that respondent violated Canons 1 and 2. {¶ 30} With regard to Count IX, we adopt the board’s conclusions of law that there was insufficient evidence presented to establish

Arth Brass & Aluminum Castings, Inc. v. Conrad

104 Ohio St. 3d 547 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 22, 2004

Pursuant to R.C. 4123.29(A)(4), an employer must be affiliated with a qualified sponsor organization to be eligible for group rating. Arth’s sponsoring organization is COSE. … R.C. 4123.512(H) clearly requires that the *554 decision to impose a charge on experience must follow “a final administrative or judicial action.”

Hamilton County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities v. Professionals Guild of Ohio

46 Ohio St. 3d 147 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1989

Thus, an entity qualifying as a body corporate and politic is a “person” as defined in R.C. 119.01(F). … This view is reinforced by the recently enacted R.C. 4117.01(A), 1 wherein the General Assembly clearly defined “person” to include a political subdivision.

Knoup v. Piqua Branch of the State Bank

1 Ohio St. (N.S.) 603 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1853

Let us understand clearly what is a francnise. The right to be a corporation has sometimes been called a franchise, but that is a misapplication of terms. … This would be clearly unconstitutional. McArthur v. Kelly, 5 Ohio, 149, 150. Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill (N. Y.) 147, 148.

Boice v. Village of Ottawa Hills

137 Ohio St. 3d 412 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 7, 2013

The end result was that there were still two lots that exceeded the 15,000-square-foot requirement, thereby qualifying as buildable lots. … It was clearly arbitrary for the village to single this lot out for a denial of the grandfathering-in treatment enjoyed by similar lots in the same neighborhood!

State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion)

150 Ohio St. 3d 489 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 25, 2017

The first juvenile court in the United States was established in 1899 in Cook County, Illinois, and the first juvenile court in Ohio was the Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court, established in 1902. … The child’s liberty interests clearly are in jeopardy if the child is treated as an adult, subject to adult penalties, in criminal courts.

Burens v. Industrial Commission

162 Ohio St. (N.S.) 549 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 16, 1955

It is similarly well recognized that qualified expert witnesses are not confined in their testimony to facts which are within their own personal knowledge but may state opinions which are based upon assumed facts. … such evidence competent, there must be testimony in the case tending to show that the services thus stated hypothetically were in fact rendered. * * * The defendant below might well object to opinions upon a hypothesis clearly

Serrill v. Wilder

77 Ohio St. (N.S.) 343 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1907

In November, 1893, Barney was re-elected to said office of county treasurer, and again qualified and entered upon the discharge of his duties on the first Monday in September, 1894, and continued in said office until about … And such we think is the American doctrine, clearly established by the overwhelming weight of authority. In Bliss v. Lawrence, 58 N.

McMechan v. Board of Education

157 Ohio St. (N.S.) 241 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1952

The certified copy of the journal entry of the Probate Court of Belmont County recites that on February 6, 1861, a jury was summoned and qualified to “justly and impartially assess according to their best judgment the amount … Statutes conferring the power of eminent domain have been considered by this court in many cases and the principle seems well established that in order to appropriate a fee simple estate the power to do so must clearly appear

Disciplinary Counsel v. Krieger

108 Ohio St. 3d 319 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 22, 2006

Respondent explained to the panel that she had initially hoped to help Willoughby develop his talents and escape his poor upbringing and environment; however, she clearly lost her perspective over time. {¶ 23} Relator proposed … From this framework, we hold that respondent is even less qualified to practice law than was the lawyer in Feneli.

Pusey v. Bator

94 Ohio St. 3d 275 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 27, 2002

The court rejected Pusey’s assertion that the nature of the work contracted for in this case qualified as an exception to the general rule. … We find that, even when viewed in the light most favorable to Pusey, the evidence clearly established YSP’s status as an independent contractor.

Herbst v. Resolution Trust Corp.

1993 Ohio 29 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1993

Code (providing a similar disclaimer of prejudice to parties who qualify under FIRREA's expedited claims procedure); and Section 1821(d)(6)(A), Title 12, U.S. … Rather, the claimant must file suit or continue a previously filed suit to establish a disallowed claim.").

State ex rel. Parker Bey v. Byrd (Slip Opinion)

160 Ohio St. 3d 141 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 5, 2020

In fact, we have recognized that the guarantee of open courts under Article I, Section 16 of the Ohio Constitution includes a qualified right to access court records that document the proceedings. State ex rel. … Could this court, through our superintendence powers, effectively immunize court officials from investigation?

City of Cincinnati v. Public Utilities Commission

151 Ohio St. 353 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 4, 1949

Since the law gives the city the power to fix rates by ordinance and the city did so fix such rates, the gas company did have the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the rates so fixed were unjust … This would appear to be clearly inconsistent with the above-quoted statement from the city’s brief as well as the nature of the product involved.

State ex rel. Welker v. Indus. Comm.

91 Ohio St. 3d 98 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 6, 2001

Claimant argued that glasses, contacts, and corneal transplants were all corrective means, and since the first two clearly did not 4  January … For purposes of determining permanent total disability, for example, maximum medical improvement can never be assessed until time has established that treatment and rehabilitation have run their course.

State v. Boykin

138 Ohio St. 3d 97 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 22, 2013

But Boykin argues that the pardon itself automatically entitles her to have her records sealed, even though she does not qualify under the expungement statutes. … Noonan, 906 F.2d 952, 958 (3d Cir.1990) (stating that the language in Garland is clearly dictum and that “a pardon does not vitiate guilt”). See also Bjerkan v.

State v. Standard Oil Co.

49 Ohio St. (N.S.) 137 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 2, 1892

If it were otherwise then, in one department of the law, fraud would enjoy an immunity awarded to it in no other. … The property and assets of the corporation could only be transferred by a corporate act, and the agreement could not in this respect, be carried into effect, other than by such corporate act; and clearly indicates that the

State ex rel. Nelsonville v. Athens Cty. Bd. of Elections

2025 Ohio 4363 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 17, 2025

Therefore, the relevant inquiry is whether the board abused its discretion or clearly disregarded applicable law by refusing to remove the statutory offices from the ballot. {¶ 30} The majority of Nelsonville’s brief … Ch. 3513], or any other requirements established by law.” R.C. 3501.39(A)(4); see also Bender at ¶ 8.