Case law

Snap-Tite, Inc. v. Noll Equipment Co.

74 Ohio Law. Abs. 572 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 1956

The provisions of the offer to sell showed clearly that the plaintiff had thirty days from February 2, 1953, to return the lathe and demand return of the purchase price. … Not only is this conclusion sustained by the record, but the fact that the agreement was within the provisions and limitations of the Price Stabilization Act is clearly established.

State v. Worden

2022 Ohio 4648 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2022

(ii) If the offense is a qualifying assault offense, the offender caused serious physical harm to another person while committing the offense, and, if the offense is not a qualifying assault offense, the offender … Subsections (B) and (C) establish the factors indicating whether the offender’s conduct is more serious or less serious than conduct normally constituting the offense.

In Re Adoption of Toth

33 Ohio App. 3d 265 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 1986

Since he does not qualify as a parent under either category (A) or (B) above, the necessity for Russell Carmichael’s consent arises, if at all, out of the putative father category found in subsection (F) above. … Having established whose consent is generally required, the legislature then established definitions of those special circumstances which eliminate the necessity of consent of persons from whom it would otherwise be required

State Ex Rel. Kay v. Board of Elections

112 Ohio App. 4 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 1960

C., to qualify for the office for which the petition was filed. … This conclusion is clearly applicable to the hearing before the board in this case.

Malone v. City of Chillicothe, Unpublished Decision (6-23-2006)

2006 Ohio 3268 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 2006

Chapter 2744 establishes a three-step analysis for determining whether a political subdivision is immune from liability. See Cater v. Cleveland (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 24 , 28 , 697 N.E.2d 610 . … Norwood City Schools (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 191 , 707 N.E.2d 868 (Cook, J., concurring). {¶ 15} "To qualify for immunity, the subdivision's function must require it to weigh multiple considerations, `not merely to "rubber

State v. Cleveland

2024 Ohio 2126 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 3, 2024

Victim was not a qualified witness to testify as to the receipt as a business record, and could not lay a foundation to establish these exhibits as business records. … However, the evidence presented in State’s Exhibits 10 through 12 clearly established appellant’s identity.

Kent State University v. Ohio Civil Rights Commission

64 Ohio App. 3d 427 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 26, 1989

The court of common pleas erred in not finding that the complainant was a qualified handicapped individual. “5. … The third element is the definition of a qualified handicapped person as defined in Ohio Adm.Code 4112-5-02(J).

Fiske v. Rooney

126 Ohio App. 3d 649 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 1998

The trial court erred in establishing that appellees met their burdens to provide affirmative evidence as to why summary judgment should be granted. “IV. … Wurmbrand’s affidavit were sufficient to qualify her as an expert witness.

Damoulakis v. Drew

2015 Ohio 5345 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 2015

BUYER assumes sole responsibility to select and retain a qualified inspector for each requested inspection * * *. … Binns, 35 Ohio St.3d 176 (1988), syllabus. 6 In effect, therefore, an “as is” clause precludes liability unless a plaintiff can establish fraud. {¶18} To establish

In Re Trust of Marshall

78 Ohio App. 1 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 13, 1946

It was not until the appellee pressed the matter in the Probate Court that the appellant qualified as trustee. … Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, it is well established that the Probate Court is given a broad discretion in a proceeding for the removal of a fiduciary or trustee. In 18 O.

State v. Morris

198 N.E.3d 1024 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 11, 2022

“The Ohio Supreme Court has clearly held that police officers may qualify as expert witnesses where they possess specialized knowledge that will -9- Case No. 7-21-05 assist the … See Crim.R. 52(B). {¶20} Significantly, the record reveals that the State never requested that the trial court qualify Rogers as an expert witness.

Heltzel v. Verikakis

2022 Ohio 1764 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 26, 2022

“Piercing the corporate veil is a judicial act that imposes personal liability on otherwise immune corporate officers, directors, or shareholders for the corporation’s wrongful acts.” United States Bank Natl. … In Belvedere, the Ohio Supreme Court established a three-part test for determining whether to pierce the corporate veil. Belvedere at 288-289.

Schaffer v. Ohio State Univ.

2025 Ohio 4962 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 2025

Moreover, Ohio State clearly and correctly addresses elsewhere the specific, different requests at issue in Doe and here. … Id. at ¶ 34. {¶ 12} Whether material qualifies as a record under R.C. 149.011(G) presents a mixed question of law and fact. Doe, 2024-Ohio-5891, at ¶ 19.

State v. Blankenship

192 Ohio App. 3d 639 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2011

However, this claim is contrary to established law applicable specifically to misdemeanor sentencing. … The General Assembly has clearly provided otherwise.

State v. Dickinson

35 Ohio Law. Abs. 559 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 1941

A person could not swear falsely unless he had taken the oath before songe one qualified to administer the oath. … It seems to us that she thereby clearly adopts as her testimony the evidence of her statements made on December 13th as testified to by the court stenographer.

Hardesty v. Corrova

27 Ohio App. 3d 332 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 11, 1986

Clearly, plaintiff had knowledge of the services and charges since he rendered the services and determined the amount to be charged. … R. 803(6) refers first to “testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness,” and then refers *336 to Evid.

Schoolcraft v. Schoolcraft

2012 Ohio 4148 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2012

Over the past decade, we’ve come up with some immunizations for some of the bacteria that commonly caused otismedia and because of those immunizations, again it’s very rare to see an acute ear infection in an eight year … In short, the trial court, as trier of fact, clearly believed appellee’s testimony that there was no longer smoking in the house.

Shoup v. Holman

81 Ohio App. 3d 127 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 18, 1991

“ * * * No service need be made on parties in default for failure to appear except that pleadings asserting new or additional claims for relief against them shall be served upon them * * In the cause at bar, Holman was clearly … 47 Ohio St.2d 146 , 1 O.O.3d 86 , 351 N.E.2d 113 , paragraph two of the syllabus. *130 Holman’s motion, while not specifying Civ.R. 60(B) or the section of Civ.R. 60(B) under which he seeks relief, appears to attempt to qualify

Miller v. Miller

2011 Ohio 4299 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 2011

In re K.K. at ¶9, quoting App.R. 4(B)(2). {¶14} We concluded in In re K.K. that “[b]y amending App.R. 4 to allow a tolling of appeal time, the Supreme Court clearly intended that its amendment to Civ.R. 53 and … The rule now adopts the latter view and also establishes a procedure for the parties to bring into the appeal the trial court’s subsequent rulings on the post-judgment filings.”

State v. Six

2023 Ohio 2892 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 18, 2023

but not to the extent of such certainty as is required ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ in criminal cases, and which will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established … As a result, we “clearly and convincingly” found that “the record did not support the sentencing court's findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(b).”