Case law

Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowman

110 Ohio St. 3d 480 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 23, 2006

Disciplinary Counsel v. … Toledo Bar Assn. v.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Scurry

115 Ohio St. 3d 201 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 20, 2007

Disciplinary Counsel v. … Cleveland Bar Assn. v.

Smith v. Ray, Supt.

149 Ohio St. 394 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1948

Upon receipt of the plan approved by the state superintendent, the county board gave notice in writing to the various local boards as prescribed by Section 4831-7, General Code. … Speaking on the subject in the case of State v. Tucker, 36 Ore., 291, 301 , 61 P., 894, 897 , 51 L. R.

State ex rel. Hardesty v. Williamson

9 Ohio St. 3d 174 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1984

Stefanick, v. … Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur.

State Ex Rel. Milburn v. Pethtel

153 Ohio St. 1 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1950

Landis, v. Board of Commissioners of Butler County, 95 Ohio St., 157 , 117 N. … Attorney General, v. Jennings, 57 Ohio St., 415 ; State, ex rel. Armstrong, v. Halliday, Aud., 61 Ohio St., 171 ; Palmer v. Zeigler, 76 Ohio St., 210 , and State, ex rel., v. Brennan, 49 Ohio St., 33 .

Randolph v. Grange Mutual Casualty Co.

57 Ohio St. 2d 25 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1979

Indemnity Co. v. Jones (1924), 111 Ohio St. 84 . On the other hand, language in an insurance contract is to be understood in its ordinary, usual or popular sense, Bobier v. National Cas. … Burns v. Employers’ Liability Assur. Corp. (1938), 134 Ohio St. 222, 230 .

State v. Vanderhorst

134 Ohio St. 3d 592 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 7, 2012

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of State v. Williams, 134 Ohio St.3d 482 , 2012-Ohio-5699 , — N.E.2d-. … O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur. O’Donnell, J., dissents.

Robbins v. Klein, Lichtenstader & Co.

60 Ohio St. (N.S.) 199 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1899

Gilman, 10 Colo., 94 , it was held that a parol assignment by a boarding house keeper of his claim against a railroad company for money due him for board of its employes, was valid. Tibbits, Assignee, v. … In Harris County v. Campbell, 68 Texas, 27 , it was held that an assignment of part of a chose in action vas valid in equity. In Noyes v. Brown et al., 33 Vt., 431 , a verbal assignment of a fund was held good.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Wolanin

121 Ohio St. 3d 390 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 1, 2009

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Wolanin, 121 Ohio St.3d 390, 2009-Ohio-1393.] DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. WOLANIN. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. … to the board’s certified report.

State v. Sullivan

132 Ohio St. 3d 75 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 10, 2012

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is vacated, and the cause is remanded to the court of common pleas for application of United States v. Jones, -U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 945 , 181 L.Ed.2d 911 (2012). … O’Connor, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur. Pfeifer, J., dissents.

State ex rel. Union County Veterans Service Commission v. Parrott

108 Ohio St. 3d 302 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 12, 2006

Duncan v. … Second, the board’s advisory opinion is informal and nonbinding. Gov.Bar R. V(2)(C).

Giancola v. Azem (Slip Opinion)

153 Ohio St. 3d 594 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 3, 2018

Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1, 3, 462 N.E.2d 410 (1984). … Arnott v.

American Guaranty Co. v. McNiece

111 Ohio St. 532 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1924

Story v. … The case of State v. Medary, 17 Ohio, 554, in principle is like the case of State ex rel. v. Griffith, supra. One Bates was appointed a member of the board of public works, and as such gave bond.

Kinsman Square Drug Co. v. Evatt

145 Ohio St. 52 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1945

Section 5546-9a, General Code, provides that a vendor against whom such an assessment is made may perfect an appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals “in the same time, manner and form as that provided in Section 5611 of the General … However, it insists that its notice constitutes a “substantial compliance” with the specific terms of that section, and reliance is placed upon the second paragraph of the syllabus in the case of Trotwood Trailers, Inc., v.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Petroff

85 Ohio St. 3d 396 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1999

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. PETROFF. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Petroff, 1999-Ohio-400.] … Russell, for respondent. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. Dayton Bar Assn. v.

State ex rel. Ohio National Bank v. Lancione

54 Ohio St. 2d 416 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1978

C. 731.41 is a codification of the “home-rule” provision of the Ohio Constitution (Article XVIII), and has been so recognized by this court in Dillon v. Cleveland (1927), 117 Ohio St. 258 . … Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney and Locher, JJ., concur. Sections 48 to 51 of the Columbus City Charter provide as follows: “Sec. 48. The Referendum.

Scholz Homes, Inc. v. Porterfield

25 Ohio St. 2d 67 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1971

Ace Steel Baling v. Porterfield (1969), 19 Ohio St. 2d 137, 138 . … Powhatan Mining Co. v. Peck (1953), 160 Ohio St. 389 .

State ex rel. Garrison v. Brough

94 Ohio St. 115 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1916

This proposition has been distinctly decided in Reemelin et al. v. Mosby, 47 Ohio St., 570 ; Harding v. Eichinger, 57 Ohio St., 371 , and Holbrook v. Smedley, 79 Ohio St., 391 . In Harding v. … Gongwer, v. Graves, 90 Ohio St., 311 .

Schulke Radio Productions, Ltd. v. Midwestern Broadcasting Co.

6 Ohio St. 3d 436 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 7, 1983

Schubert v. … Brown, JJ., concur. W. Brown, J., concurs separately.

City of Cincinnati v. Thomas Soft Ice Cream, Inc.

52 Ohio St. 2d 76 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1977

In Akron v. … Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney and Logher, JJ., concur. R.