Case law

Fair v. School Employees Retirement System

53 Ohio St. 2d 118 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1978

School Employees Retirement Board was 'established pursuant to R. C. 3309.03 et seq. … Such a result clearly does not comport with the scheme created by the General Assembly which established a separate and independent agency to oversee and manage the school employees retirement funds under R. C.

State ex rel. Husted v. Brunner

123 Ohio St. 3d 288 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 6, 2009

Husted claims that the secretary of state and the board of elections abused their discretion and clearly disregarded applicable law by ruling that he is not a qualified elector of Montgomery County. B. … For the following reasons, the secretary of state clearly disregarded applicable law in so ruling. {¶ 29} First, the secretary of state erred in concluding that Section 3, Article II of the Ohio Constitution is inapplicable

Vandemark v. Southland Corp.

38 Ohio St. 3d 1 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1988

Therefore, with respect to this particular allegation, the employer is immune from suit pursuant to R.C. 4123.74. … Zimmerman offered his own dissenting viewpoint: «* * * [W]here an employee sustains an injury through the negligence or misconduct of his employer, which is clearly outside the scope of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, he

Andersen v. Highland House Co.

93 Ohio St. 3d 547 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 14, 2001

On the basis of these representations, nearly every state, including Ohio, allowed the introduction of this new, qualified pollution exclusion.” (Footnotes omitted.) Id. … As the final authority on Ohio law, we must take the opportunity to prevent an absurd and unreasonable result — one that was never clearly intended by Highland House or RMI and one that was never clearly communicated by Indiana

Johnson v. BP Chemicals, Inc.

85 Ohio St. 3d 298 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1999

Clearly, the constitutional impediments at issue in Brady , concerning former R.C. 4121.80, also apply with equal force to R.C. 2745.01. Both statutes were enacted to serve identical purposes. … By establishing the foregoing standards in R.C. 2745.01, the General Assembly has created a cause of action that is simply illusory.

T. Ryan Legg Irrevocable Trust v. Testa (Slip Opinion)

149 Ohio St. 3d 376 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 28, 2016

Absent a finding that the tax commissioner’s conclusion was “clearly unreasonable or unlawful,” the findings in the final determination are “presumptively valid.” See Hatchadorian v. … The assessment does not violate the trust’s due-process rights {¶ 64} The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guards against a state’s exceeding its jurisdiction to tax by establishing a twofold test.

City of St. Marys v. Auglaize County Board of Commissioners

115 Ohio St. 3d 387 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 3, 2007

Chapter 3734 did not qualify the landfill as a matter of public concern. 64 Ohio St.3d at 390 , 596 N.E.2d 423 . … Chapter 3734, qualified a sanitary landfill as a matter of public concern. This court determined that R.C.

Clark v. Southview Hosp. & Family Health Ctr.

68 Ohio St. 3d 435 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1994

Southview, TMES was obligated to provide qualified physicians to staff the emergency department at Southview twenty-four hours per day. … Courts are constantly confronted with the necessity of extending established principles to new conditions.

State ex rel. Walker v. LaRose (Slip Opinion)

164 Ohio St. 3d 569 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 17, 2021

The words “qualified voters” * * * must be taken to mean not those qualified and entitled to vote, but those qualified and actually voting. … is a majority of those actually voting, unless a contrary legislative intention and purpose is very clearly expressed.”

State ex rel. Ohio History Connection v. Moundbuilders Country Club Co.

171 Ohio St. 3d 663 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 7, 2022

appraiser alone established that it had made its offer in good faith. … Leffler, 119 Ohio App.3d 424, 695 N.E.2d 777 (1997) (holding in an action discussing immunity from tort liability of a political subdivision that bad faith is the opposite of good faith); Hoskins v. Aetna Life Ins.

True Christianity Evangelism v. Tracy

87 Ohio St. 3d 48 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 13, 1999

An established or organized society or corporation. … The BTA determined that appellant’s “purpose is clearly to disseminate a religious message.”

State ex rel. Schwaben v. School Employees Retirement System

76 Ohio St. 3d 280 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1996

Appellant’s contentions are clearly contrary to the express terms of R.C. 3309.39(C). … Such a result clearly does not comport with the scheme created by the General Assembly which established a separate and independent agency to oversee and manage the school employees retirement funds under R.C.

State v. Jones

67 Ohio St. 2d 244 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1981

It clearly concerns an evidentiary standard. Prior to the 1978 amendment, R. … There is no evidence in the record that Dickerson was so qualified.

Mook v. Akron Savings & Loan Co.

87 Ohio St. (N.S.) 273 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1913

We have simply to determine a question of law; that .is to say, what legal relations do the facts in the record establish; and what rights and duties spring out of those relations? … It is perfectly clear to us on the record, that the plaintiff was regularly appointed and fully qualified and empowered to bring this suit as the successor of L. A.

State Ex Rel. Patterson v. Industrial Commission

77 Ohio St. 3d 201 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1996

R.C. 4127.04 clearly violates appellant’s right to equal protection of the laws. … Clearly, R.C. 4127.04 and 4123.59 were enacted to fulfill this objective of compensating employees and their dependents.

State Ex Rel. McGinley v. Bliss

149 Ohio St. 329 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1948

were simultaneously filed and bore- the signatures of the required number of qualified electors- and registered voters. … 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 4785-7la, General Code, and that the refusal to accept

Fallang v. Hickey

40 Ohio St. 3d 106 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1988

I The principal issue presented is whether Fallang established personal jurisdiction over Long. Because the trial court determined Long’s Civ. … Clearly, the mailing of the letter to Ohio was an intentional act by Long. It is this act which allegedly resulted in the claimed injury.

City of Akron v. Public Utilities Commission

149 Ohio St. 347 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1948

The city further concedes that the evidence submitted to the commission clearly established that the supply of gas available, through the pipe lines of the natural gas companies operating in Ohio, with minor exceptions, will … These are set forth very clearly in 11 American Jurisprudence, 980 and 1002, Sections 252 and 264.

Baker v. Beckwith

29 Ohio St. 314 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1876

The giving away of intoxicating liquors was attended with complete immunity from punishment, and was a fruitful source of intoxication. … Had the words “ contrary to this act” been retained in the seventh section as amended, no civil liability now clearly included and existing, would have attached to a violation of the provisions of the act of 1864, or the

Ostrander v. Preece

129 Ohio St. 625 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1935

When, therefore, the power of the legislature to enact a given law is disputed, the question is whether such exercise of power is clearly prohibited. … Stoddard of their property without due process of law by establishing a conclusive presumption of the order of death contrary to fact.