Case law

Cleveland Clinic Found. v. Cleveland Bd. of Zoning Appeals (Slip Opinion)

2014 Ohio 4809 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 5, 2014

C.C.O. 343.01(b)(2) sets forth various uses that qualify as retail business for local or neighborhood needs in a Local Retail Business District. … These uses include a variety of retail establishments, eating establishments, service establishments, business offices, automotive services, parking garages, charitable institutions, and signs.

Trustees of University of Pennsylvania v. Troxel

148 Ohio St. 332 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1947

It is a well established principle of law that a testamentary instrument will be construed and applied so as to give effect to the desires of the testator. … An examination of the provisions in this will clearly ■ indicates that the testatrix reposed great confidence *341 and trust in the persons selected by her and obviously intended that they or someone chosen by them should

State ex rel. Maurer v. Sheward

71 Ohio St. 3d 513 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1994

Although the Ohio Constitution places the clemency power in the hands of the Governor, that power clearly is not absolute. … An attempted pardon that is granted without adherence to constitutionally authorized requirements is invalid and is not immune to challenge. .

State ex rel. Rhoads v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Elections (Slip Opinion)

165 Ohio St. 3d 562 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 16, 2021

show that respondents abused their discretion or clearly disregarded the law in certifying the ballot language. … Bd. of Elections, __ Ohio St.3d __, 2021-Ohio-1038, __ N.E.3d __, ¶ 7-8: “When a local issue qualifies for the ballot, the board of elections may either use the entire text of the proposed charter

Greenlee v. Cole

113 Ohio St. 585 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1925

The facts bearing upon this contention are as follows: Williams was duly appointed and qualified as a member of the board January 19! … Its subsequent action in attempting to appoint and designate employes to operate the electric light plant was not within its authority, for that power was clearly and exclusively conferred upon the board of trustees of public

State ex rel. Cooker Restaurant Corp. v. Montgomery County Board of Elections

80 Ohio St. 3d 302 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1997

For the reasons that follow, the board did not abuse its discretion or clearly disregard applicable law by dismissing Cooker’s protest because it was not submitted by an attorney. … Based on the evidence presented by the parties, relators have not established their entitlement to the requested extraordinary relief. This conclusion moots the parties’ various motions.

State ex rel. Doersam v. Industrial Commission

45 Ohio St. 3d 115 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 23, 1989

In part, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: “* * * [N]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; * * * nor deny … Since equal protection embodies the guarantee that people in similar circumstances will be dealt with in a similar manner, and R.C. 4123.59(B) clearly does not do so, our next inquiry must be whether the establishment of

Jones v. Stevens

112 Ohio St. 43 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1925

It is not for the court to sit in judgment upon the wisdom or folly of the parties in making a contract, when their intention is clearly expressed, and there is no fraud or illegality. * * * The interests of the public are … May it not be said that those who have spent years in a business are better qualified to fix this value than others?

Trustees of Washington Township v. Davis

95 Ohio St. 3d 274 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 15, 2002

Clearly, the “telecommunications towers” exception in R.C. 519.211(B) recognizes that some public utilities will use telecommunication towers to provide service. … Id. {¶ 19} Applying these factors to the radio broadcast station before us, we identify very few characteristics that would qualify it as a public utility.

State v. Gravett

65 Ohio St. (N.S.) 289 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 3, 1901

The comprehensive language of the statute and the purpose which it clearly indicates require the conclusion that osteopathy is within the practice now regulated. … established seems to be inadmissible.

State ex rel. Bolzenius v. Preisse (Slip Opinion)

155 Ohio St. 3d 45 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 14, 2018

If adopted, the proposal would establish a "bill of rights" related to water, soil, and air protection and prohibit certain oil-and-gas-extraction activities within the city. … After the Franklin County Board of Elections certified a sufficient number of valid signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot, the Columbus City Council, on July 30, passed an ordinance instructing the elections board

State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Solove

52 Ohio St. 3d 6 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1990

Though the General Assembly has clearly adopted a policy of confidentiality in the juvenile courts, it has not expressly mandated closure of juvenile hearings. … It first argues that Schmerbeck’s testimony is insufficient to establish a substantial probability of harm to Tessa.

Fox v. Industrial Commission

162 Ohio St. (N.S.) 569 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1955

Thus, there was nothing to prevent this plaintiff from asking a qualified expert witness a proper hypothetical question calling for his opinion as to whether plaintiff’s accidental injury was the “natural and probable cause … If there was any merit to plaintiff’s claim, a qualified expert that he selected to support his claim should have been able to testify at least that plaintiff’s accidental injury was “the cause” (Hall v.

City of Cleveland v. Public Utilities Commission

100 Ohio St. (N.S.) 121 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1919

Judge Shauck in the Lynch case, which is the parent home-rule case of Ohio, said much about the “immunity” of municipalities from general laws, and that one of the ways of accomplishing that “immunity” was “by the adoption … Now, how can this “immunity” be made practical and effective if the general assembly in the exercise of its police power through some board or .'

State v. Bradford

55 Ohio St. 2d 116 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1978

The first assumption goes clearly against the language of II. B. 300. … State (1893), 50 Ohio St. 428 , or when it deprives the accused of any substantial right or immunity possessed before its passage, United States v. Pallardino (C. A. 1, 1974), 490 F. 2d 499 .

State v. Kidd

167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 521 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1958

as constitutional and valid against a variety of attacks, such as, that they constitute class legislation, that they are too uncertain, that they violate the constitutional rights of citizens as to equal privileges and immunities … We think the Klotz and Correll cases are clearly distinguishable from the instant ones, and that those cases are in no way decisive here.

Redden v. Constitution Life Ins.

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 20 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1961

This is apparent from the opinion of the Court of Appeals reading in part: “* # * there was no proof submitted by the plaintiff supporting the requirement of the policy that liability cannot be established under part E (f … answer to any interrogatory made by an applicant in his application for a policy shall bar the right to recover upon any policy issued thereon, or be used as evidence at any trial to recover upon such policy, unless it is clearly

DeRolph v. State

78 Ohio St. 3d 193 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1997

Madison (1803), 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 [ 2 L.Ed. 60 ], establishes the judicial branch as the final arbiter in interpreting the Constitution. *216 “The doctrine of judicial review is so well established that it is beyond cavil … The record documents that many school districts lack experienced and qualified teachers.

Cook-Johnson Realty Co. v. Bertolini

15 Ohio St. 2d 195 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 10, 1968

Appellant argues that Articles II and X of the Ohio Constitution clearly demonstrate that the grant of a referendum power to the electorate in a township on zoning matters is an impermissible delegation of legislative power … Appellant’s reliance on specific reservations of the powers of initiative and referendum in the Ohio Constitution to the people of the state on state laws, and to the people of each municipality on municipal laws, to establish

Durkin v. Williams

169 Ohio St. 3d 10 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 3, 2022

The appellate court’s mandate establishes the law of the case on the legal questions involved in that appeal, State ex rel. Baker v. … The necessary second step in evaluating John’s prohibition claim involves determining whether his argument so clearly establishes a violation of the mandate that Judge Williams’s lack of jurisdiction was patent and unambiguous