Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersohioctapp

8,699 results

0.95s

  • Rudy v. Loral Defense Systems

    85 Ohio App. 3d 148 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 1993

    . *151 The standard of review for an appeal of a decision granting summary judgment is well established. … less qualified applicants.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • State, Ex Rel. Rose v. Ryan

    119 Ohio App. 363 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 1963

    This is also the date established by state statute for the election of certain nonmunicipal offices and for certain nonmunicipal issues. … However, the two sections of the charter clearly define the format of the ballot and, in our opinion, clearly cover the matter.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • State v. Reed

    2024 Ohio 4838 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 2024

    . {¶28} The record contains ample information that establishes that Kramer was qualified to testify as an expert witness. … However, he stated that this did not interfere with his ability to remember the events of that evening clearly.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Engel v. Williams Cty., F-07-027 (8-1-2008)

    2008 Ohio 3852 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2008

    Testimony adduced through depositions clearly described actions taken at the site with the aim of controlling flooding. … However, the decision in Howard clearly is not limited to circumstances involving only ice.

    Cited 2 timesUnpublished
  • Lang v. Director, Ohio Department of Job & Family Services

    196 Ohio App. 3d 80 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 2011

    Obtain reemployment by the last day of the 26th week after the worker’s qualifying separation from the TAA/ATAA certified employment. … The Department of Labor’s interpretation in this case, presented in an internal guidance letter, however, does not qualify for the dispositive force described in Chevron.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • State v. Johnson

    119 N.E.3d 914 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 2018

    Mizikar was qualified to testify as an expert in this matter. {¶43} Insofar as appellant challenges the reliability of Det. … After careful review of the record, we cannot clearly and convincingly find that the record does not support the trial court’s findings.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Hall v. Gill

    108 Ohio App. 3d 196 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 1995

    Clearly, as the Tax Court stated in Clapham, Stolk was not intended to enunciate a rule of law. … To establish a claim for accountant negligence, the client must establish that the accountant failed to exercise the skill and knowledge normally possessed by members of that profession in good standing in similar communities

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Amrhein v. Telb, Unpublished Decision (9-29-2006)

    2006 Ohio 5107 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 29, 2006

    appellant argues that the trial court judgment was "patently unfair" because it denied appellant an opportunity to conduct discovery which could have revealed sufficient facts in support of the complaint. {¶ 10} It is well established … Thus, we focus our analysis accordingly. {¶ 13} R.C. 311.05 establishes the limited liability and qualified immunity of appellee.

    Cited 4 timesUnpublished
  • Carr v. Central Printing Co., Unpublished Decision (10-13-2000)

    Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 2000

    Industrial Comm. (1984), 12 Ohio St.3d 199 , a trucking company that had used an employment agency to obtain qualified truck drivers objected to the Industrial Commission's conclusion that it had been the employer of one … To allow Carr to sue for negligence in addition to recovering through workers' compensation is a result that clearly was not intended by the workers' compensation laws.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Hulse v. Hulse

    2014 Ohio 1106 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 2014

    In 2009, Karen filed a motion for an order requiring Glenn to provide information for and to execute a Qualified Domestic Relations Order regarding the division of his retirement benefits. … That the parties specifically chose and agreed to this coverture formula language clearly indicates that they did not intend to implement the hypothetical award formula.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Morgan v. Ohio State Univ. College of Dentistry

    2014 Ohio 1846 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 1, 2014

    Moreover, as to the tort of lack of informed consent, it observed that appellant "clearly has the ability at this time to go forward with whatever subsequent treatment he would choose [and] has failed to prove * * * that … Holloway was entitled to immunity pursuant to R.C. 2743.02(F) and 9.86 and that the court of common pleas therefore lacked jurisdiction over any civil actions appellant had against Dr. Holloway.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Ingram v. Glavin

    216 N.E.3d 710 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 2023

    Ingram asserts that because she has a master’s degree in reading education, a reasonable jury would find that she was qualified as an intervention specialist. … Thus, absent any of the exceptions to immunity provided in R.C. 2744.02, none of which are applicable here, the Board is categorically immune from claims brought by parents, taxpayers, and other community members.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Fisher v. City of Cleveland

    48 Ohio App. 3d 44 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 9, 1988

    Appellant clearly established that a genuine issue existed as to whether the circumstances at Fairfax Recreational Center and the city’s failure to provide security created a climate substantially certain to cause injury … Clearly, in the case sub judice, defendant’s actions involved the exercise of executive planning and a high degree of official discretion.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Donlin v. Rural Metro Ambulance, Inc., Unpublished Decision (3-12-2004)

    2004 Ohio 1704 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 2004

    Co. (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 621 , 631 , fn. 4. {¶ 23} Further, Vogelsang's statement could not be qualified as an excited utterance because she could not identify the declarant. … Clearly, the determination of whether appellee's conduct was willful or wanton was the ultimate question for resolution.

    Cited 10 timesUnpublished
  • GMAC Bank v. Bradac

    2017 Ohio 7888 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2017

    In Bradac’s affidavit, she never stated that the exhibits were true and accurate copies of the originals, and she clearly lacked personal knowledge regarding most of these computer printouts. {¶21} Also, under the … Bradac clearly lacked personal knowledge to authenticate this document. {¶26} Finally, exhibit No. 13 consisted of photocopies of some checks payable to Bradac and Kohl but not endorsed.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • In re Duncan

    62 Ohio Law. Abs. 173 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 5, 1951

    The facts set forth are .not sufficient to establish a case of nondependency, and the facts in the case of Smith v. Privette, 13 Abs 291 , are not applicable. … Clearly, paragraphs 2 and 3 have no application to the facts presented.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • State v. Bissantz

    3 Ohio App. 3d 108 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1982

    It is impossible, of course, to establish value which is universal. On a desert island gold has no value, because no one desires it. … Lieberman (1961), 114 Ohio App. 339 [ 17 O.O.2d 464 ], We hold that a job commitment is a valuable thing because at least some people desire it, and in this case, appellant clearly desired it.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Mason v. Bristol L. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn., Unpublished Decision (9-29-2006)

    2006 Ohio 5174 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 29, 2006

    . {¶ 25} The Supreme Court set forth a three-tiered analysis to determine whether a political subdivision is immune from tort liability: the first tier is to establish immunity under R.C. 2744.02 (A)(1); the second tier is … . {¶ 26} For the purposes of the immunity statute, appellees qualify for general immunity since public school districts are "political subdivisions" pursuant to R.C. 2744.01 (F), and R.C. 2744.01 (C)(2)(c) states that the

    Cited 4 timesUnpublished
  • Longo v. Longo

    2014 Ohio 4880 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 2014

    established that the fee amount requested was clearly excessive in light of the circumstances of the case.” {¶18} When evaluating an order for compensation to a guardian ad litem, a reviewing court shall consider … The statement offered by appellee purports to establish the time spent working in accordance with this general duty.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • State v. Chamberlain

    2014 Ohio 4619 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 20, 2014

    This ruling was sufficient to qualify Dr. Kennebeck to testify as to her expert opinion of S.R.' … Chamberlain argues that the use of this evidence would have "clearly benefitted" his case. {¶ 51} Whether or not the presentation of certain evidence would have "clearly benefitted" an appellant's case is not the

    Cited 8 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.