Case law

In re Application of Ohio Power Co. (Slip Opinion)

140 Ohio St. 3d 509 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 7, 2014

On October 1, 2004, Ohio Power transferred control of its transmission assets to PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., one of six regional power grids regulated by FERC.1 PJM, a qualifying entity under R.C. 4928.12 … The appellant bears the burden of demonstrating that the commission’s decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence or is clearly unsupported by the record.

Munic. Court v. State, Ex Rel.

126 Ohio St. 103 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1933

And the action of the court after it had regularly pronounced the punishment provided by law for the offense is clearly obnoxious to the objection that it is an attempted exercise of power not judicial but vested in the executive … the following language by Chief Justice Hughes: "We are unable to approve the view that the court, although treating the statute as applicable despite the entrapment, and the defendant as guilty, has authority to grant immunity

Mestetzko v. Elf Motor Co.

119 Ohio St. 575 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1929

legal duty, and for the purchase of necessities, are voidable at the election of the infant, and may be disaffirmed by him upon reaching his majority, or within a reasonable time thereafter. *582 This particular contract clearly … It recognizes the plaintiff’s right to repudiate his promise and sue for the return of his payments, and his immunity from a plea of estoppel in so doing.

State v. Ellis

98 Ohio St. (N.S.) 21 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1918

Clearly the foregoing examination of the venireman in the instant case discloses simply this, thát his views touching murder in the first degree clearly established beyond a reasonable doubt that in such case he would not … A juror might, if that prejudice were strong enough, refuse to concur in a first degree verdict, notwithstanding the evidence clearly showed to a moral certainty the guilt of the accused.

State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward

86 Ohio St. 3d 451 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 16, 1999

immunity for athletic coaches, actions by a roller skater with supporting affidavits in a medical claim, and so on. … immunity for athletic coaches, actions by a roller skater with supporting affidavits in a medical claim and so on.

State ex rel. Holderman v. Indus. Comm.

2026 Ohio 2371 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 24, 2026

is not entitled to death benefits as a wholly or partly dependent person. {¶ 15} The case was assigned to a magistrate, who found that the commission had not abused its discretion in finding that Holderman did not qualify … Holderman argued that she was entitled to the presumption that she was wholly dependent on her father for support and that a remand was unnecessary because the facts had clearly established that she was at least partially

Board of Pensions of United Presbyterian Church in the United States v. Bowers

173 Ohio St. (N.S.) 89 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 7, 1962

The board of pensions has clearly been “established,” and it is equally clearly an “organization,” which, obviously, under the statute may be either *94 incorporated or unincorporated. … Any organization seeking exemption as to the succession tax must meet the test established by the Legislature of being an “established religious organization” and can not qualify for such exemption merely by showing that

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Lawrence

137 Ohio St. 3d 299 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2013

And when she finally filed the documents, she did not submit the required shared-parenting plan or qualified-domestic-relations order. … V(10)(B) through (G), she shall be required to submit documentation that (1) she has completed a current mental-health assessment performed by a qualified health-care professional, (2) a qualified health-care professional

Princeton City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Zaino

94 Ohio St. 3d 66 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 16, 2002

Furthermore, R.C. 321.04 authorizes the treasurer to appoint deputies, and a “deputy, when duly qualified, may perform any duties of his principal.” R.C. 3.06. … Akron (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 535, 538, 706 N.E.2d 323, 328 (this court will declare a statute unconstitutional only when the legislation and constitutional provision are clearly incompatible); State ex rel. Dickman v.

Snedaker v. King

111 Ohio St. 225 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 7, 1924

In this the opinion of the majority is clearly in error. … An unbroken line of authorities establishes the proposition that equity has jurisdiction in a proper case to restrain trespass.

State ex rel. Aycock v. Mowrey

45 Ohio St. 3d 347 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 27, 1989

Rather, Judge Mowrey claims jurisdiction because South Carolina is also not Greg Jr.’s home state since Greg Jr. lived there with his maternal grandparents, and they do not qualify as persons “acting as parents” under the … Beyond this, Aycock cites R.C. 3109.26 to establish that the UCCJA does not condone the removal or retention of a child in violation of a valid custody decree.

In re Election of Member of Rock Hill Bd. of Edn.

76 Ohio St. 3d 601 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 9, 1996

However, the evidence before the board of elections at the November 15, 1995 hearing established that five of these electors (Richard E. Cole, Kenneth A. Drake, Nancy M. … Each of the electors was a qualified absentee voter because each had planned to be (and was) out of the county on election day. See R.C. 3509.02(A)(7).

State v. Orr

91 Ohio St. 3d 389 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 2, 2001

Clearly, these checkpoints constituted a very limited intrusion into travelers’ privacy and sense of security. … The introduction to the guidelines states that, in 1998, when the city of Dayton established its checkpoint program, approximately thirty percent of the traffic citations issued by the Dayton Police Department were for driver

City of Warrensville Heights v. Jennings

58 Ohio St. 3d 206 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1991

The polygraph machine can be a useful investigative tool when the test is skillfully prepared and is administered and interpreted by a qualified person; while it is not accurate to the degree that absolute judgments can be … It has been established that a public employer may discharge an employee for refusing to answer questions specifically related to the employee’s performance of his or her official duties. In Gardner v.

State ex rel. Gannett Satellite Information Network v. Shirey

78 Ohio St. 3d 400 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 14, 1997

If the City had undertaken this task without hiring PDI, the applications would clearly have been subject to the open-record law. … Gannett has established a sufficient public benefit. See Plain Dealer, 75 Ohio St.3d at 36-37 , 661 N.E.2d at 192 , quoting Kenai v.

United Fuel Gas Co. v. City of Ironton

107 Ohio St. (N.S.) 173 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 6, 1923

In short, part 1 provided for the immunity of the municipality from general laws in its strictly municipal affairs, except as provided in Section 13. … What the court found a clearly legal contract on July 5,1921, it now finds to be clearly illegal, though the company meanwhile has occupied the streets and public places of the city, has exercised any and all rights under

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Alsfelder

138 Ohio St. 3d 333 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 13, 2014

we imposed a one-year suspension, fully stayed on conditions, for Alsfelder’s conduct in accepting employment without disclosing that his professional judgment could be affected by his own personal interests, charging a clearly … Kealy, 125 Ohio St.3d 238, 2010-Ohio-1554, 927 N.E.2d 591, ¶ 13, 19 (finding that 25 years of involvement with the legal aid society, a “staggering amount” of pro bono work, and a long history of volunteerism qualify as a

State ex rel. Petit v. Wagner

170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 297 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1960

This question is squarely presented because one of the respondents was *299 qualified under a municipal ordinance to take the examination but was not so qualified under state statute. … Clearly, the respondent Jones, who was not a member of the municipality’s police department, could not have qualified to take the examination if this statute has application, and it obviously is applicable unless it has been

State v. Keith

79 Ohio St. 3d 514 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1997

In that case, as the Supreme Court held, voir dire showed that the prospective juror was “ ‘clearly qualified to be seated as a juror under the Adams and [Wainwright v.] … In contrast, in the case at bar, both the trial court and counsel agreed that the prospective jurors were not qualified to sit on the panel before that was clearly established by voir dire.

State ex rel. Harris v. Rubino (Slip Opinion)

155 Ohio St. 3d 123 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 7, 2018

On July 30, the board certified that the petition contained 870 valid signatures, which the parties agree is more than the number necessary to qualify the petition for the ballot under R.C. 731.28. … Does the Charter Clearly and Expressly Conflict with R.C. 731.28?