Case law

State v. Jackson

107 Ohio St. 3d 53 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2005

Thus, Heile established that one of the weapons used in the shootings was a .380 automatic pistol. … Moreover, the fact that defendant bears the burden of establishing juror partiality, see Wainwright v.

State v. Morgan (Slip Opinion)

153 Ohio St. 3d 196 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 13, 2017

.” {¶ 28} In construing the meaning of a statute, “ ‘we may not restrict, constrict, qualify, narrow, enlarge, or abridge the General Assembly’s wording.’ ” Dillon v. … of the original laudable purpose of juvenile courts, studies and critiques in recent years raise serious questions as to whether actual performance measures well enough against theoretical purpose to make tolerable the immunity

Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson

116 Ohio St. 3d 468 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 27, 2007

A legislative act impairing it would be clearly unconstitutional.” … In Conley, Kurt Shearer argued that he was immune from liability because he was a governmental employee. Whether Shearer was entitled to immunity was deemed a question of law that was not triable to a jury.

In re Adoption of Greer

70 Ohio St. 3d 293 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1994

III {¶ 28} Although we resolve this case on the basis of statutory construction, we would be remiss were we not to advise the probate courts of this state as to what has clearly been illustrated in this case to be … time as the probate adoption forms may be reviewed or amended, we strongly urge the bench and bar of this state to revise or adapt those forms as may be appropriate when prepared for delivery to unwed putative fathers not qualifying

State v. Phillips

74 Ohio St. 3d 72 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1995

Cox which clearly indicate that Sheila died also as a result of the severe beating she sustained on January 18. Dr. … The members of the venire in this case were “death-qualified” in small groups.

State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Bloom

177 Ohio St. 3d 174 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 22, 2024

Regardless of where the constitutional floor might be for public access to juvenile-court proceedings, R.C. 2151.356(B)(1)(d) and 2151.357(A) clearly fall below that floor. … The majority thinks the open-courts provision of the Ohio Constitution clearly goes to 11, but the majority offers no coherent argument about what that actually means.

State ex rel. Platt v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Elections

2025 Ohio 2079 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 17, 2025

By seeking only the emails transmitting the memo but not the memo itself, Platt argues, he “was clearly avoiding seeking that which would arguendo be protected by attorney-client privilege.” … Platt has therefore established his entitlement to statutory damages under R.C. 149.43(C)(2). See State ex rel. Ware v.

State v. Lang

129 Ohio St. 3d 512 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 31, 2011

Accordingly, Dittmore was qualified to testify as an expert on these matters under Evid.R. 702. … Moreover, the court’s instructions clearly described the aggravating circumstances that the jury was to consider during deliberations.

Danis Clarkco Landfill Co. v. Clark Cty. Solid Waste Mgt. Dist.

73 Ohio St. 3d 590 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 6, 1995

The RFP sought "proposals from qualified bidders to design, construct and operate solid waste management facilities for the benefit of the District and its Residents," and indicated the District's willingness to accept proposals … The RFP clearly authorized the consideration of a bidder’s past record of performance in evaluation of its bid.

State v. Turner

2026 Ohio 1996 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2026

January Term, 2026 {¶ 34} The juvenile courts’ function is to determine whether the statutory conditions for adult prosecution have been satisfied—most critically, whether probable cause that the child committed a qualifying … This is clearly wrong. 27  SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 2.

State v. Mason (Slip Opinion)

153 Ohio St. 3d 476 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 18, 2018

To prevail on his facial challenge, Mason must establish "beyond a reasonable doubt that the legislation and constitutional *478 provisions are clearly incompatible." State ex rel. Dickman v. … Although that offense was a capital felony under Florida law, the jury's verdict alone did not qualify Hurst for the death penalty: at the time of his conviction, Florida law provided that " '[a] person who has been convicted

City of Urbana ex rel. Newlin v. Downing

43 Ohio St. 3d 109 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 24, 1989

protection of the First Amendment does not extend because they ‘are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly … Joe Scott, an assistant professor of sociology, was qualified as an expert in human sexuality, sociology and obscenity. Dr.

State v. Wilson

74 Ohio St. 3d 381 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1996

DeBolt’s testimony was clearly admissible. DeBolt placed Wilson in Lutz’s Oldsmobile between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. on May 4, corroborating that part of Wilson’s confession. … At that point, he clearly knew what he was doing and intoxication would not reasonably be available as a defense to negate “knowledge.”

Weidman v. Hildebrandt

178 Ohio St. 3d 3 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 8, 2024

Therefore, adoption of the single- publication rule here would change established Ohio law. … Shaver, 149 Ohio St. 231 (1948), paragraph five of the syllabus (“A statute’s wording ‘“may not be restricted, constricted, qualified, narrowed, enlarged or abridged . . . .”’”). {¶ 110} R.C.

WCI Steel, Inc. v. Testa

129 Ohio St. 3d 256 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 7, 2011

Bell, the present case presents no such “fundamental dissimilarity” because the AccuVal appraisal that WCI presented at the BTA integrates a mix of approaches into a replacement-cost study, and such an appraisal does not qualify … Lindley (1986), 21 Ohio St.3d 66, 21 OBR 365, 488 N.E.2d 145, that case does state that the commissioner’s findings are “presumptively valid, absent a demonstration that those findings are clearly unreasonable or unlawful

State ex rel. Clay v. Cuyahoga Cty. Med. Examiner's Office (Slip Opinion)

152 Ohio St. 3d 163 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 30, 2017

the autopsy report, he can obtain photos of the dead body of the daughter he murdered. {¶ 61} Thus, the lead opinion’s application of R.C. 313.10(C)(1) is at odds with R.C. 149.43(B)(8), which the General Assembly clearly … By murdering his daughter, Clay established that he has no regard for any of her interests or the interests of her other family members, least of all their privacy.

Hardy v. VerMeulen

32 Ohio St. 3d 45 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 12, 1987

We do not suggest that causes of action as they existed at common law or the rules that govern such causes are immune from legislative attention. As this court said in Fassig v. State, ex rel. … Thus, the passage in Lafferty relied upon by the majority stands for the well-established principle that the General Assembly may not retroactively destroy a vested right (Section 28, Article II), not that the legislature

State v. Smith (Slip Opinion)

167 Ohio St. 3d 423 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 3, 2022

History of the juvenile-justice system and transfer proceedings {¶ 18} One of the primary reasons for establishing juvenile courts, which began to be established in the United States at the end of the 19th century, … “It is admitted that if the will of the legislature be clearly ascertained, a court of law [is] bound to carry it into effect, however inexpedient or injudicious [it] may deem it.”

State ex rel. Waste Mgt. of Ohio, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.

171 Ohio St. 3d 68 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 22, 2022

The SHO also found that S.G. had failed to establish that Gelhausen lost the use of his arms or legs before his death. … Furthermore, “there is no language in R.C. 4123.57(B) requiring that an injured worker be consciously aware of his paralysis in order to qualify for scheduled loss benefits.” Id. at ¶ 16.

Canton Storage & Transfer Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.

72 Ohio St. 3d 1 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1995

judgment for that of the commission on factual questions where there is sufficient probative evidence in the record to show that the commission's order is not manifestly against the weight of the evidence and is not so clearly … Thus, any qualified carrier could obtain a statewide certificate and compete on equal footing.