Case law

State ex rel. Chattams v. Pater

131 Ohio St. 3d 119 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 12, 2012

Chattams v. Pater, 131 Ohio St.3d 119, 2012-Ohio-55.] THE STATE EX REL. CHATTAMS, APPELLANT, v. PATER, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Chattams v. Pater, 131 Ohio St.3d 119, 2012-Ohio-55.] … O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. __________________ D’Anthony Chattams, pro se.

S. S. Kresge Co. v. Bowers

2 Ohio St. 2d 113 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1965

Kresge Co. v. … Hence, the decision of the board is affirmed.” In other words, the precise holding in the case of Kresge v.

Good Samaritan Hospital of Dayton v. Porterfield

29 Ohio St. 2d 25 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1972

See, also, Cleveland v. … Board of Tax Appeals (1971), 27 Ohio St. 2d 255, 258 . We also recognize that R. C. 5739.02(B) (12) “defines ‘charitable purposes’ far more explicitly” than does R. C. 5709.12. Ohio Children’s Society v.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera

1994 Ohio 199 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1994

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera (1994), Ohio St.3d .] Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- Indefinite suspension -- Conviction for perjury. … V(9)(a)(iii). One member of the panel recommended that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law. The board adopted the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the panel.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Klaas

91 Ohio St. 3d 86 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 20, 2001

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. KLAAS. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Klaas, 2001-Ohio-276.] … Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.

State ex rel. DeTorio v. Industrial Commission

135 Ohio St. (N.S.) 214 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1939

City of Elyria v. Vandemark, 100 Ohio St., 365 , 371, 372, 126 N. E., 314 . … If the Legislature has the power to create additional boards clothed with power to hear and finally determine claims', there is no denying its power to multiply such boards at will even to the creation of one such board for

State ex rel. Jones v. Ansted

131 Ohio St. 3d 125 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 19, 2012

Jones v. Ansted, 131 Ohio St.3d 125, 2012-Ohio-109.] THE STATE EX REL. JONES, APPELLANT, v. ANSTED, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Jones v. Ansted, 131 Ohio St.3d 125, 2012-Ohio-109.] … O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. _________________ Marquise Jones, pro se. Thomas L.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Detty

96 Ohio St. 3d 57 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2002

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. DETTY. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Detty, 2002-Ohio-2992.] … review we adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board.

State ex rel. Dix v. Angelotta

18 Ohio St. 3d 115 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1985

Woodbury, v. Spitler (1973), 34 Ohio St. 2d 134 [ 63 O.O.2d 229 ], syllabus. … Brown, Douglas and Wright, JJ., concur. R.C. 2945.71(C)(2) mandates that a person charged with a felony shall be brought to trial within two hundred seventy days after his arrest.

City of Columbus v. Public Utilities Commission

10 Ohio St. 3d 23 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1984

See Columbus v. Pub. Util. … Brown, Ford, Holmes, C. Brown and J.P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur. Locher, J., concurs in judgment only. Ford, J., of the Eleventh Appellate District, sitting for Sweeney, J.

Hecht v. Levin

66 Ohio St. 3d 458 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1993

V(1)(A), we created the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline ("the board") to assist this court in carrying out its disciplinary responsibilities. … A grievance is kept private until a panel of the board makes a finding of probable cause and certifies it to the board. Gov.Bar R. V(11)(E)(2).

Boles v. Knab

130 Ohio St. 3d 339 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 4, 2011

[Cite as Boles v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 339, 2011-Ohio-5049.] BOLES, APPELLANT, v. KNAB, WARDEN, APPELLEE. [Cite as Boles v. Knab, 130 Ohio St.3d 339, 2011-Ohio-5049.] … See Tisdale v. Eberlin, 114 Ohio St.3d 201, 2007- Ohio-3833, 870 N.E.2d 1191, ¶ 7 (“a claimed violation of a right to a speedy trial is not cognizable in habeas corpus”); Smith v.

Cleveland Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision

73 Ohio St. 3d 715 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1995

Co. v. … Co. v.

State v. Hunt

47 Ohio St. 2d 170 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 21, 1976

Miller v. Aderhold (1933), 288 U. S. 206 ; Berman v. United States (1937), 302 U. S. 211 ; State v. Chamberlain (1964), 177 Ohio St. 104 , 202 N. E. 2d 695 ; Columbus v. Stires (1967), 9 Ohio App. 2d 315 , 224 N. … Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur. “‘If the court or jury finds, upon the hearing provided for in Section 2945.37 of the Revised Code, that the accused is sane, he shall be proceeded against as provided by law.

Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Misch

82 Ohio St. 3d 256 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1998

Co. v. J.C. Penney Co. (1986), 27 Ohio St.3d 31 , 27 OBR 447, 501 N.E.2d 617 . … Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. Dworken (1934), 129 Ohio St. 23, 28 , 1 O.O 313, 315, 193 N.E. 650, 652 ; Akron Bar Assn. v. Miller (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 6, 7 , 684 N.E.2d 288, 290 .

State ex rel. Peabody Coal Co. v. Indus. Comm.

1993 Ohio 82 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1993

Claimant also suggests that the regional board's silence on the gainful employment issue indicates a rejection of that assertion. In support, claimant cites State ex rel. DeMint v. Indus. … Nye v. Indus. Comm. (1986), 22 Ohio St.3d 75, 22 OBR 91, 488 N.E.2d 867; State ex rel. Johnson v. Rawac Plating Co. (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 599, 575 N.E.2d 837.

Hausman v. Dayton

73 Ohio St. 3d 671 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 13, 1995

The board also ruled on the merits of the appeal and found that pursuant to R.C.G.O. 152.01, J. V. … The various cases were consolidated. {¶ 9} The trial court affirmed the decision of the board as to Green and BancOhio, finding that when J. V.

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Stridsberg

123 Ohio St. 3d 69 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 26, 2009

[Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Stridsberg, 123 Ohio St.3d 69, 2009-Ohio-4182.] CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. STRIDSBERG. [Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. … A panel of board members made findings of fact and conclusions of law and adopted the recommended sanction of the parties, a six- month suspension stayed on conditions. {¶ 3} The parties have not objected to the board

Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman

83 Ohio St. 3d 148 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1998

OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. ZUCKERMAN. [Cite as Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman, 1998-Ohio-125.] … of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court (“board”).

Throckmorton v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision

75 Ohio St. 3d 227 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1996

THROCKMORTON, APPELLANT, v. HAMILTON COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION; HAMILTON COUNTY AUDITOR, APPELLEE. [Cite as Throckmorton v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision, 1996-Ohio-226.] … Assn. v. Cuyahoga Cty.