Case law

State v. Rucker

135 Ohio St. 3d 218 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 6, 2012

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed in part and reversed in part on the authority of State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479 , 985 N.E.2d 432 . … O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

Goins v. Pineda

128 Ohio St. 3d 358 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 9, 2011

[Cite as Goins v. Pineda, 128 Ohio St.3d 358, 2011-Ohio-529.] GOINS, APPELLANT, v. PINEDA, WARDEN, APPELLEE. [Cite as Goins v. Pineda, 128 Ohio St.3d 358, 2011-Ohio-529.] … O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. __________________ Dana Goins, pro se.

State Ex Rel. Hinchliffe v. Gibbons

116 Ohio St. 390 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1927

The board of elections is not in any sense a municipal functionary. It is strictly a board and an arm of the state government. … This controversy is in all essential respects *396 similar to Switzer v. State ex rel. Silvey, 103 Ohio St., 306 , 133 N. E., 552 .

Simpson v. Maxwell

1 Ohio St. 2d 71 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1964

Jetter v. Maxwell, Warden, 176 Ohio St., 219 ; Brown v. Maxwell, Warden, 174 Ohio St., 29 . The irregularity of an arrest cannot be inquired into by habeas corpus after conviction. Shelton v. … Page v. Green, Supt., 174 Ohio St., 178 ; Jackson v. Maxwell, Warden, 174 Ohio St., 32 ; In re Poage, 87 Ohio St., 72 . This is a question which must be raised by appeal. Petitioner remanded to custody. Taet, C.

Binder v. Cuyahoga Cty. (Slip Opinion)

161 Ohio St. 3d 395 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 4, 2020

See generally Ayers v. … the board or commission.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Bubna

116 Ohio St. 3d 294 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 12, 2007

See BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(b), (d), and (g). {¶ 23} As to precedent, the board aptly observed: {¶ 24} “The prevailing attitude of the Supreme Court is * * * accurately reflected in the opinion in Dayton Bar Assn. v. … Notwithstanding all of these factors this Respondent was given a six month suspension.” {¶ 26} In Dayton Bar Assn. v.

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Maher

110 Ohio St. 3d 346 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 20, 2006

Like the panel, the board recommended a public reprimand, presenting this explanation for the panel’s recommendation: {¶ 15} “We find this case almost identical to that of Medina County Bar Association v. … V(4)(G). Such violations are not present in this case. James S. Thomasson and John Weisensell, for relator.

Cox v. Ohio State Univ. Hosp.

80 Ohio St. 3d 1220 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1997

COX, EXR., APPELLANT, v. OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS, APPELLEE. [Cite as Cox v. Ohio State Univ. Hosp., 1997-Ohio-409.] Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed. … Montgomery, Attorney General; Emens Kegler, Brown, Hill & Ritter, William J. Brown and Karl W. Schedler, for appellee. Bricker & Eckler, James J. Hughes, Jr., and Catherine M.

State ex rel. Hickman v. Capots

45 Ohio St. 3d 324 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 20, 1989

Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co. (1988), 40 Ohio St. 3d 190, 193 , 532 N.E. 2d 753, 756 . The cases cited by appellant, Mack v. McCune (C.A. 10, 1977), 551 F. 2d 251 , and Robinson v. … Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

State v. Weideman

91 Ohio St. 3d 1446 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 14, 2001

Cause consolidated with 00-2126, State v. Weideman, Portage App. No. 98-P-0109. The conflict cases are State v. Filler (1995), 106 Ohio App.3d 731 , 667 N.E.2d 54 ; State v. Tennison (Apr. 14, 1989), Wood App. No. … WD-88-41, unreported, 1989 WL 35534 ; State v. Brown (Apr. 16, 1999), Pickaway App. No. 98CA27, unreported, 1999 WL 259649 ; and State v. Hammons (Aug. 28, 1998), Montgomery App. No. 16931, unreported, 1998 WL 543363 .

State v. Murnahan

63 Ohio St. 3d 60 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1992

However, in Manning v. … Brown, JJ., dissent. .

State ex rel. Maston v. McGinnis

106 Ohio St. (N.S.) 231 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1922

Maxwell, Prosecuting Attorney, v. Wilson et al., ante, 224. In that case it was held that the people’s elected board of education was the legal board of Muskingum county. In the present case the defendant, John S. … That the appointive board was the legal board. In the State, ex rel., v.

State ex rel. Evans v. Moore

69 Ohio St. 2d 88 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1982

See, also, Beachwood v. … Brown, JJ., concur. W. Brown, J., concurs in the syllabus and judgment. Locher, Holmes and Krupansky, JJ., dissent.

Phillips v. Burt

77 Ohio St. 3d 1229 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1997

The “alerting event” rationale of Browning v. Burt (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 544 , 613 N.E.2d 993 , is a departure from prior law. … I would reverse this case and overrule Browning. Moyer, C.J., and Stratton, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Lawrence

147 Ohio St. 3d 315 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2016

V(13)(C)(1), (3), (4), (5), and (6). The parties agree that just one aggravating factor is present—that Lawrence engaged in a pattern of misconduct. See Gov.Bar R. V(13)(B)(3). … V(16) and recommend that we adopt the agreement in its entirety. In support of this recommendation, the panel referred to a new trial, United States v. Lawrence, 6th Cir.

State v. Johnson (Slip Opinion)

144 Ohio St. 3d 518 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 1, 2015

State v. … Brown’s testimony in 2011 was somewhat inconsistent with his testimony in 1998. But the fact that a witness changes his story is not sufficient to establish perjury. United States v. Lebon, 4 F.3d 1, 2 (1st Cir.1993).

Akron Bar Association v. Glitzenstein.

154 Ohio St. 3d 557 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 26, 2018

V(13)(B)(2), (3), and (4). … the four cases that the parties cited in support of their stipulated sanction, the board found Disciplinary Counsel v.

Reywal Co. v. City of Dublin

128 Ohio St. 3d 270 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 9, 2010

. {¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed in judgment only on the authority of Campbell v. … Brown, C.J., and Pfeifer and Cupp, JJ., dissent and would not accept the discretionary appeal.

State Ex Rel. Shriver v. Hayes

148 Ohio St. 681 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1947

Ingerson, v. Berry, Jr., Clerk, 14 Ohio St., 315 ; State, ex rel. Wetmore, v. Stewart, Clerk, 26 Ohio St., 216 ; State, ex rel. Grisell, v. Marlow, 15 Ohio St., 114 ; Peck v. Weddell, 17 Ohio St., 271 . … In the case of Foster v.

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Farmer

111 Ohio St. 3d 137 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 1, 2006

V(6)(H), the panel’s unanimous dismissal and decision not to refer Count One to the board for further review disposed of those charges. We do not review such dismissals. Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. … V(8)(D), we review the board’s findings of misconduct as to Counts Two and Three, to which respondent objects; the board’s recommended sanction, to which relator objects; and respondent’s further objection to the board’s