Case law

Luck v. Klayman

2017 Ohio 8231 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 2017

While Klayman goes to great lengths to emphasize the federal nature of his judgment against Judicial Watch, he makes no attempt to articulate how proceeds from a federal judgment are immune to a valid lien under R.C. 2333.01 … Because his financial status was clearly relevant to the creditor’s bill action, and the information was not privileged or otherwise exempt from discovery, Klayman’s second assignment of error is overruled.

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.

Malone v. City of Chillicothe, Unpublished Decision (6-23-2006)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

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.

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.

Miller v. Lexington Court Care Ctr.

2026 Ohio 237 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 27, 2026

A determination of immunity, we stated, is not a determination of liability, id., whereas a dismissal based on the statute of limitations is a dismissal on the merits. … establish that the nonmoving party has no legally cognizable cause of action.”

Vasquez v. Village of Windham, Unpublished Decision (12-1-2006)

2006 Ohio 6342 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 1, 2006

Agricultural Soc. , supra, at 557. {¶ 10} In the instant case, it is undisputed that appellees, as a "political subdivision" and police department, meet the first step of the analysis and qualify for general immunity. … Clearly, the Portage County Courthouse is not a Windham building, and thus the case is distinguishable from Hubbard ."

Dunbar v. State

2012 Ohio 707 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 2012

The State contends that Dunbar’s initial guilty plea to the abduction charge precludes him from qualifying as a “wrongfully imprisoned individual.” … Thus, when the trial court decided to deviate from the plea agreement, it should have clearly advised Dunbar of its intention, and allowed him to reconsider his plea. Id. at ¶ 140.

Bexley Village, Ltd. v. Limbach

68 Ohio App. 3d 306 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1990

While appellant disputes this issue, sufficient evidence was presented to establish that the property was used as a student parking lot in furtherance of the university’s purpose. … The words “connected with,” as used in R.C. 5709.07, clearly have a broader meaning than the words “belonging to.”

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.

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.”

Clapp v. Mueller Electric Co.

162 Ohio App. 3d 810 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 2005

Appellant objected that the testimony was improper because the witness had not been qualified as an expert. … Thus, Clapp clearly was familiar with the services rendered. {¶ 32} Appellants contend that Clapp’s testimony was improper, however, because he actually gave expert testimony without being qualified as an expert or submitting

Mentor v. Jarvis

2023 Ohio 1538 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 8, 2023

Lumumba, 741 F.2d 12, 14-15 (2d Cir.1984) (defendant’s alleged status as “Vice President and Minister of Justice of the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika” did not entitle him to immunity from contempt … It is unclear how additional time would have helped appellant prepare to defend the charges, and appellant has not established how he was clearly prejudiced (especially because it appears, given the “motion” or documentation

State v. Stutz

2023 Ohio 1082 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2023

In other words, when running qualifying offenses consecutively, the court must add up the minimum terms of the Reagan Tokes qualifying offenses (in this case 8 years + 8 years = 16 years) and then add 50% of the minimum … Because there was partial compliance, Stutz must establish that the trial court’s error caused prejudice. State v. Perdue, 2022-Ohio-722, 185 N.E.3d 683, ¶ 12 (2d Dist.).

Masucci v. Burnbrier

2015 Ohio 4102 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 30, 2015

The alleged threat does not qualify as non-hearsay under Evid.R. 801(D)(2) as an admission of a party opponent because it was introduced within hearsay statements. … Even if the alleged threat itself would not be hearsay, the statements of the two daughters relating the threat are clearly hearsay.

State v. Adams

2019 Ohio 3597 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 6, 2019

Recall that, pursuant to R.C. 2901.22(B), the state may establish knowledge if Mr. … Under the governing statute, RPI qualifies as the victim of Mr. Adams’s actions, whereas PNC sits as a mere third party.

Dr. Safadi & Assocs., Inc. v. McColley

2023 Ohio 1234 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2023

“Immunology” is “a science that deals with the immune system and the cell-mediated and humoral aspects of immunity and immune responses,” and an immunologist is “a specialist in immunology.” … technique (as surgery); esp: a physician who is qualified by advanced training and certification by a specialty examining board to so limit his practice.”

Shields v. King

40 Ohio App. 2d 77 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 1973

King’s duties were to provide professional expertise needed in the establishment and operation of the hemodialysis unit. … We are in agreement with this interpretation and believe that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is clearly applicable to the medical profession where the conditions necessary to its application are present.

Eve v. Rutledge

73 Ohio App. 3d 366 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 1, 1991

Thus, we find that the transaction did not satisfy the criteria established by R.C. 1334.01(D)(1). The arrangement is therefore disqualified from consideration as the sale of a business opportunity plan. … The facts with respect to appellants’ allegation of fraud clearly fall within the holding of Keller v.