Case law

City of Cincinnati ex rel. Crotty v. City of Cincinnati

50 Ohio St. 2d 27 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1977

C. 3745.04, an appeal “for an order vacating or modifying the action of the Director of Environmental Protection” may be brought before the Environmental Board of Review and “the Environmental Board of Review has exclusive … Brown, JJ., dissent. Stern, J., retired, assigned to active duty under authority of Section 6(C), Article IV, Constitution, sitting for P. Brown, J. Thoms v. Greenwood (1878), 6 Ohio Dec. Rep. 639 , affirmed 3 W. L.

Lake County Bar Ass'n v. Patterson

64 Ohio St. 2d 163 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1980

.***” Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Stein (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 77, 81 . … Brown, McBride, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes and Dowd, JJ., concur. McBride, J., of the Second Appellate District, sitting for P. Brown, J.

State Ex Rel. Hague v. Ashtabula County Board of Commissioners

123 Ohio St. 3d 489 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2009

Hague v. Ashtabula Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 123 Ohio St.3d 489, 2009-Ohio- 6140.] THE STATE EX REL. HAGUE v. ASHTABULA COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ET AL. … Ray v.

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Collins

48 Ohio St. 2d 233 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1976

The decision of .the board is there-, fore affirmed, but since we see no need to remand the cause to' the Tax Commissioner, we sustain C.E.I.’s appeal and thus direct the Board of Tax Appeals to issue the appropriate order … Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

FirstCal Industrial 2 Acquisitions, L.L.C. v. Franklin County Board of Revision

125 Ohio St. 3d 485 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 6, 2010

IV & V, L.P. v. Franklin Cty. … BROWN, C.J., not participating. __________________ Wayne E. Petkovic, for appellant. Rich & Gillis Law Group, L.L.C., and Mark H.

M. J. Kelley Co. v. City of Cleveland

32 Ohio St. 2d 150 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1972

In Zangerle v. … Schneider, Herbert, Corrigan, Stern, Leach and Brown, JJ., concur.

AP Hotels of Illinois, Inc. v. Franklin County Board of Revision

118 Ohio St. 3d 343 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2008

. {¶ 1} The Board of Education of the Canal Winchester Local School District (“BOE”) appeals from a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals (“BTA”), in which the BTA adopted a reduced valuation of an Amerihost motel property … See Satullo v.

State ex rel. Taylor v. Whitehead

70 Ohio St. 2d 37 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 5, 1982

Curtiss v. … Brown, Sweeney, Holmes, C. Brown and Krupansky, JJ., concur. Locher, J., concurs in the judgment.

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Hamilton

88 Ohio St. 3d 330 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 29, 2000

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Absent any mitigating factors, disbarment is the appropriate sanction for an attorney’s misappropriation of client funds. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. … See, e.g., Disciplinary Counsel v. Lowrey (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 2, 4 , 706 N.E.2d 758, 759 ; Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Stebbins (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 7, 9 , 706 N.E.2d 762, 763 ; see, also, Disciplinary Counsel v.

Ryan v. Tracy

6 Ohio St. 3d 363 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1983

Foreman, v. … Brown, Sweeney, Holmes and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur. C. Brown, J., dissents.

State ex rel. Griffin v. Krumholtz

70 Ohio St. 2d 125 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 26, 1982

Senn, v. Bd. of Elections (1977), 51 Ohio St. 2d 173, 174 ; State, ex rel. Evergreen Co., v. Bd. of Elections (1976), 48 Ohio St. 2d 29, 31 . We find no reason in this case to depart from this salutary principle. … Brown, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and Krupansky, JJ., concur. Celebrezze, C. J., and Sweeney, J., dissent.

State ex rel. Board of State Teachers Retirement System v. Davis

113 Ohio St. 3d 410 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 23, 2007

Weiss v. … Kline v.

State ex rel. Canales-Flores v. Lucas County Board of Elections

108 Ohio St. 3d 129 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 25, 2005

Rose v. Lorain Cty. … Lee v. Karnes, 103 Ohio St.3d 559 , 2004-Ohio-5718 , 817 N.E.2d 76, ¶ 25 , quoting State v.

Bar Ass'n of Greater Cleveland v. Sanders

24 Ohio St. 3d 5 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 14, 1986

After a thorough examination of the record, we concur with the findings of the board. … Brown, Douglas and Wright, JJ., concur.

Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Vitullo

86 Ohio St. 3d 549 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1999

CUYAHOGA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. VITULLO. [Cite as Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Vitullo, 1999-Ohio-121.] … Respondent represented Brown in another matter. Both respondent and Brown had informed Mrs. Pietrzak that respondent had to handle their case or “there would be no case.”

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Levin

35 Ohio St. 3d 4 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1988

This court finds that respondent committed the disciplinary violations identified by the board. Accordingly, this court adopts the board’s recommendations. … Brown, JJ., concur. Wright, J., concurs in judgment only.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Capers

15 Ohio St. 3d 122 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1984

Upon careful review and consideration of the evidence, this court concurs in the finding of the board that respondent violated Canon 7A(1)(b) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and concurs in the recommendation that respondent … Brown, Sweeney, C. Brown and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur. Celebrezze, C.J., dissents. Locher and Holmes, JJ., dissent separately.

Board of Education of the City School District v. Featherstone

110 Ohio St. 669 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 20, 1924

It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be and the same is hereby, affirmed for the reason that the election of the defendant in error by the board of education of the city … school district of the city of West Park on January 5, 1920, as clerk of that board, did not confer upon him any function of sovereignty or constitute him an officer within the prohibition of Section '20, Article II of the

Hawthorn Mellody, Inc. v. Lindley

65 Ohio St. 2d 47 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1981

Brown, J. The Tax Commissioner herein appeals a number of the board’s determinations. For reasons set forth, we affirm in part and reverse in part. I. … We must ignore the board’s disposition as respects the case conveyor system because the board may have relied upon the dictum in Custom Beverage Packers v. Kosydar, supra, which we herein repudiate.

New Boston Coke Corp. v. Tyler

32 Ohio St. 3d 216 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 2, 1987

Thus, in General Motors v. … Brown, JJ., dissent.