Case law

Bachmayer v. Toledo Board of Education

44 Ohio App. 3d 104 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 20, 1988

In Leach v. … In Van Fossen v.

Armstead v. Lima City Board of Education

75 Ohio App. 3d 841 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 28, 1991

The scope of review for an appellate court on questions of law is set forth in Kisel v. … The Newsome court found, in light of the requirements set forth in Goss v.

Giovanetti v. Ohio State Dental Board

63 Ohio App. 3d 262 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 1991

See State v. Giovanetti (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 603 , 554 N.E.2d 1297 . The appellant argues that the dental board, therefore, is obviously inconsistent in their proceedings. … State v. Good (1960), 110 Ohio App. 415 , 83 Ohio Law Abs. 65 , 11 O.O.2d 459 , 165 N.E.2d 28 , paragraph one of the syllabus. The annotation to the case of Henderson v.

Hickey v. Ohio State Medical Board

62 Ohio App. 3d 182 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 1989

Dept. of Liquor Control v. Santucci (1969), 17 Ohio St.2d 69 , 46 O.O.2d 402 , 246 N.E.2d 549 . … This court in Hyde v.

Ladd v. Ohio Counselor & Social Worker Board

76 Ohio App. 3d 323 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 1991

Nonetheless, when the evidence meets the standard or is uncontroverted, there is no statutory authority by which a trial court may reverse, vacate or modify the board’s order. Hale v. Ohio State Veterinary Med. … Bd. of Commrs. v. Ford (1987), 35 Ohio App.3d 88, 92 , 520 N.E.2d 1, 4 . Under R.C.

Davis v. State Personnel Board of Review

20 Ohio App. 3d 150 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 1984

Lander, v. … These facts are crucial to the board’s findings on several of the charges of misconduct. Under the standards set out in Univ. of Cincinnati v.

Landesman v. Board of County Commissioners

9 Ohio App. 2d 319 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 1967

It is stated in Board of Commissioners of Butler County v. … In Lexa v.

Webb v. State Personnel Board of Review

27 Ohio App. 2d 226 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 18, 1971

Such hearing may be conducted by the board of review or by the person or persons designated by the board. … While the order of the State Personnel Board of Review did not discuss this problem, the board did find that “the conclusion of the state director of personnel was correct and cannot be overturned by this board.”

Riffe v. Ohio Real Estate Appraiser Board

130 Ohio App. 3d 46 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 23, 1998

Bd. of Edn. v. State Bd. of Edn. (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 705, 707 , 590 N.E.2d 1240, 1241 ; Reese v. Bd. of Trustees of Copley Twp. (June 30, 1998), Summit App. … Appellant contends that the Board’s error denied her right to due process of law. We disagree. *51 Due process is a flexible concept, and the procedures required vary as demanded by circumstances. Morrissey v.

Epperly v. Medina City Board of Education

64 Ohio App. 3d 74 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 6, 1989

Conant v. Johnson (1964), 1 Ohio App.2d 133, 135 , 30 O.O.2d 157, 158 , 204 N.E.2d 100, 101 . … Peterson v. Teodosio (1973), 34 Ohio St.2d 161 , 63 O.O.2d 262 , 397 N.E.2d 113 . Epperly claims, in his complaint, that due to the board’s negligence he has sustained numerous injuries.

Salotto v. Wickliffe Board of Zoning Appeals

193 Ohio App. 3d 525 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 8, 2011

Although the “practical difficulties” standard was originally recognized in Kisil v. … Caudill v. Thomas, 11th Dist. No. 2009-P-0087, 2011-Ohio-524 , 2011 WL 379123 , at ¶ 17, citing Gaul v. Gaul, 11th Dist.

Ach v. Board of County Commissioners

49 Ohio App. 127 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 25, 1934

of County Commissioners, said cause being captioned in the Probate Court of Hamilton county: "George Struble, et al. v. … Bradley, v. Board of County Commissioners of Cuyahoga County, 128 Ohio St., 181 , 190 N. E., 571 , are found some observations which are suggestive of our construction of the statute.

Tancer v. Board of Liquor Control

98 Ohio App. 460 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 1953

DiCillo & Sons, Inc., v. Chester Zoning Board of Appeals, 158 Ohio St., 302 , 109 N. … E. (2d), 8, held that the defendant administrative board did not have the right of appeal from an adverse decision of the Common Pleas Court. Later, in Corn, d. b. a. Colonial Inn Restaurant, v.

Sullivan v. Hamilton County Board of Health

155 Ohio App. 3d 609 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2003

Park Disk v. … Group v.

Duffy v. Hamilton County Board of Commissioners

92 Ohio App. 3d 717 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 1994

McCruter v. Bd. of Review (1980), 64 Ohio St.2d 277, 279 [ 18 O.O.3d 463, 464-465 , 415 N.E.2d 259, 260-261 ]. See, also, Griffith v. J.C. … Kenney v. Evatt, Tax Commr. (1945), 144 Ohio St. 369 [ 29 O.O. 541 , 59 N.E.2d 47 ] and Detelich v. Dept. of Liquor Control (Franklin App.1950), 62 Law Abs. 195 [ 107 N.E.2d 415 ].”

James v. Trumbull County Board of Education

105 Ohio App. 3d 392 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 24, 1995

The board’s primary duty is to interpret the significance of the facts.” Aldridge v. Huntington School Dist. (1988), 38 Ohio St.3d 154 , 157— 158, 527 N.E.2d 291, 294 . … Graziano v. Amherst Exempted Village Bd. of Edn. (1987), 32 Ohio St.3d 289, 293 , 513 N.E.2d 282, 285 . *396 From there, the decision of the school board may be appealed to the court of common pleas.

State v. Brown, 2008 Ca 33 (4-24-2009)

2009 Ohio 1933 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 24, 2009

We granted Brown's motion on June 5, 2008, and we appointed appellate counsel for him. On October 2, 2008, Brown filed "On Appellant's pro se Motion Requesting Leave of Court to File pro se Brief of Merit per Anders v. … Brown's arguments fail; his sentence is within the statutory range, it was recommended to the trial court by Brown and the State, and it was imposed by a sentencing judge.

Graham v. Ohio Board of Bar Examiners

98 Ohio App. 3d 620 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 1994

Burkey v. S. Ohio Correctional Facility (1988), 38 Ohio App.3d 170, 171 , 528 N.E.2d 607, 608 . … Sparks v. Character & Fitness Commt. of Ky.

Kennerly v. Montgomery County Board of Commissioners

158 Ohio App. 3d 271 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 13, 2004

It noted that the amendments on which the board relied were parts of several “tort reform” efforts that the court had held unconstitutional in State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. … Yates v.

Steckler v. Ohio State Board of Psychology

83 Ohio App. 3d 33 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 5, 1992

R.C. 119.12; Arlen v. State (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 168 , 15 O.O.3d 190 , 399 N.E.2d 1251 ; Ohio State Bd. of Pharmacy v. … Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1915), 92 Ohio St. 362 , 110 N.E. 952 ; Farrao v. Bur. of Motor Vehicles (1975), 46 Ohio App.2d 120 , 75 O.O.2d 106 , 346 N.E.2d 337 ; see Pioneer Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc. v.