Case law

State v. Stallings

89 Ohio St. 3d 280 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 19, 2000

court improperly “excused for cause jurors who expressed] reservations about capital punishment but did not excuse for cause jurors who expressed very strong feelings in favor of capital punishment.” *287 However, death-qualifying … Moreover, defendant has not established that the trial court abused its broad discretion.

Wightman v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

86 Ohio St. 3d 431 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1999

constitute behavior qualitatively different from that which may be characterized as merely negligent” and, therefore, contributory negligence is not available as a defense where-conduct in conscious disregard, has been established … Berg did not qualify as an expert under Evid.R. 702.

Ohioans for Concealed Carry, Inc. v. Columbus (Slip Opinion)

164 Ohio St. 3d 291 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 18, 2020

court noted in ProgressOhio.org, Inc., a statute’s silence “as to who has standing to maintain a constitutional challenge to the legislation does not render the statute ambiguous,” nor “will we read the statutory silence as clearly … They also alleged that members had not registered their firearms, because they were unsure whether they qualified as “assault weapons” under the ordinance. Id. at 528.

State ex rel. McCoy v. Dedicated Transport, Inc.

97 Ohio St. 3d 25 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 16, 2002

Thus, we characterized as voluntary “a termination generated by the claimant’s violation of a written work rule or policy that (1) clearly defined the prohibited conduct, (2) had been previously identified by the employer … In establishing the “former position of employment” test for TTD claims, Ramirez was merely informing us that a standard exists for measuring “total disability” in TTD claims that differs from that used to measure “total

Rands v. Kendall

15 Ohio St. 671 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1846

His action of ejectment cannot be defeated by proof that the possessory right is in the mortgagee, because that possessory right is qualified and of a peculiar character, unlike the absolute right to the possession for a … I am clearly and decidedly of opinion that Adbeel Coleman was seized of an estate of inheritance during the coverture, and that his widow is entitled to dower.

State v. Monroe

105 Ohio St. 3d 384 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 25, 2005

The manner in which the victims were killed clearly points to purposeful killings. Both victims were stabbed repeatedly and shot in the head. {¶ 44} Both Boyd and White testified for the state. … Thus, Devillers was qualified to testify as an expert on such matters under Evid.R. 702, even though the court did not formally qualify him as one. See State v.

Gerrity v. Chervenak (Slip Opinion)

162 Ohio St. 3d 694 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 17, 2020

As Richards’s sole heir and as successor to her interest in the mineral rights, Gerrity qualifies as a “holder” under R.C. 5301.56(A)(1). … A statute’s use of “shall” connotes a mandatory obligation unless other statutory language clearly indicates a contrary intent. Wilson v. Lawrence, 150 Ohio St.3d 368, 2017-Ohio-1410, 81 N.E.3d 1242, ¶ 13.

State ex rel. Fenstermaker v. Grogan

2026 Ohio 482 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 17, 2026

Grogan has not argued that Fenstermaker’s public- records request was ambiguous, and “the limited number of documents sought by [Fenstermaker] . . . were clearly identified and should not have been difficult to locate, review … {¶ 32} In my view, the record and brief filed in this case sufficiently establish that Fenstermaker is entitled to statutory damages.

City of Columbus v. Public Utilities Commission

103 Ohio St. (N.S.) 79 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 5, 1921

The Public Service Commissions Law (§ 26, §49, subd. 1) and the Railroad Law (§181) deal with maximum rates of fare established by statute but make no reference in terms to rates established by agreement with local authorities … It was held that all contracts entered into between municipalities and others are valid and immune against any law or state constitution impairing their obligations, unless *116 such contracts are “prejudicial to the peace

State v. Taylor

98 Ohio St. 3d 27 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 20, 2002

To establish an effective waiver of counsel, the trial court must determine whether the defendant fully understands and intelligently relinquishes his right to counsel. … Voir Dire Issues {¶61} In his twelfth proposition of law, appellant argues that the trial court erred in the manner that it permitted selection of a death-qualified jury.

State v. Craig

110 Ohio St. 3d 306 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 20, 2006

Taylor (C.A.1, 1993), 985 F.2d 3, 6 (“An affiant’s knowledge of the target’s prior criminal activity or record clearly is material to the probable cause determination”). {¶ 35} The facts in the affidavit gave the judge issuing … Kohler has reviewed all of the pertinent aspects of this autopsy and is qualified to render expert opinions regarding this matter.” {¶ 76} During her testimony, Dr.

State v. Belton (Slip Opinion)

149 Ohio St. 3d 165 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 20, 2016

Instead, Detective Quinn clearly told Belton, “I ain’t making you no promises.” … Although Belton was clearly not a model prisoner, there is some evidence that he began to cause fewer disciplinary problems as he spent more time in prison. Dr.

State v. Madrigal

87 Ohio St. 3d 378 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 4, 2000

Cathcart’s attempts to portray himself as the innocent bystander do not qualify as a statement against interest and should have been excluded. … The record clearly establishes that Madrigal brought the Brooks case to the court’s attention, both orally and in writing, and then twice entered a further objection to the court’s instruction.

State v. Taylor

98 Ohio St. 3d 27 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 20, 2002

To establish an effective waiver of counsel, the trial court must determine whether the defendant fully understands and intelligently relinquishes his right to counsel. … Voir Dire Issues {¶ 61} In his twelfth proposition of law, appellant argues that the trial court erred in the manner that it permitted selection of a death-qualified jury.

State v. Gowdy

88 Ohio St. 3d 387 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 28, 2000

. {¶ 14} In 1875, the United States Congress prohibited the race-based exclusion of any qualified citizen from jury service. … Clearly, defendant did not receive that which was due to him under the statute.

State v. Worthy

88 Ohio St. 3d 513 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 28, 2000

The first, which took effect on January 1, 1997, established a new classification system for convicted sex offenders. … Its provisions merely establish remedial registration and notification requirements for those sex offenders adjudicated to be a habitual sex offender or a sexual predator.

State v. Pugh

43 Ohio St. (N.S.) 98 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1885

duties defined by the act, and not the board itself; that the designation of “ the trustees heretofore appointed ” exclude any hereafter appointed, and that no successors of any present trustee can be lawfully appointed or qualified … That this is not the exercise of the appointing power by the general assembly is how too firmly established to be called in question. State v. The Judges, 21 Ohio St. 1 ; Walker v. Cincinnati, 21 Ohio St. 14 ; State v.

State ex rel. Robertson v. Board of Education

27 Ohio St. (N.S.) 96 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1875

Without going into an extended examination of authorities to establish this proposition, we deem it sufficient to refer to 1 Dillon Mun. Corp. 307, sec. 416c et seq; Comm’rs Knox Co. v. Aspinwall, 21 How. 539 ; St. … The time of relator’s purchase does not seem clearly ascertained. He first says : “ I bought them about the time they bear date.”

State v. Clinton

2017 Ohio 9423 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2017

The court also rejected claims of actual prejudice stating, "The Court has qualified 72 prospective jurors on the issue of pretrial publicity and capital punishment. … Forensic evidence also established that Clinton raped C.J.

Hope Academy Broadway Campus v. White Hat Mgt., L.L.C. (Slip Opinion)

145 Ohio St. 3d 29 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 15, 2015

. {¶ 69} Review of the contract clearly shows that the governing boards conferred on the White Hat companies “all functions” relating to management of the schools, leaving the governing boards no control over management. … First, fiduciary relationships are established by agreement. The agreement here identified White Hat as an independent contractor.