Case law

Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church v. Bevan

2 Ohio App. 182 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 1913

A hypothetical question may assume such facts within the range of the evidence as the party believes the evidence tends to establish. Louisville, N. A. & C. Ry. Co. v. Wood, 113 Ind., 544 . … In this case we are clearly of the opinion that the verdict of the jury is clearly and manifestly against the weight of the evidence and contrary to law.

State v. Tolliver

33 Ohio App. 3d 110 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 18, 1986

The federal rule provides: “For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that he has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from him or established by public record during cross-examination … R. 102, supra, the common law has been superseded only to the extent clearly indicated by the rules.

State v. Hayes

2016 Ohio 7241 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 2016

The photograph was clearly probative of such matters and was presented during the testimony of Dr. … Although it failed to formally tender any of the other witnesses as experts, the record establishes that the State elicited sufficient information to qualify them as experts in their respective fields.

Winfield Constr. v. Oakton, Inc., Unpublished Decision (6-17-2005)

2005 Ohio 3085 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 2005

The 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 to analyze whether … . {¶ 17} Winfield does not dispute that Painesville meets the first step and qualifies for general immunity under R.C. 2744.02 (A).

Mary Ann Lauer Living Revocable Trust v. McManus

2025 Ohio 5669 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2025

Likewise, to establish a breach of fiduciary duty, the plaintiff must “establish the existence of a fiduciary duty, breach of that duty, and injury proximately caused by the breach.” Wall-Meiring v. … It alleged that the guardian breached his fiduciary duty and negligently administered the ward’s estate by failing to qualify the ward for Medicaid in a timely manner. Id. at 72.

Young v. Genie Industries United States, 89665 (3-6-2008)

2008 Ohio 929 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 2008

Wean United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 317 , 327 , 364 N.E.2d 267 . {¶ 9} It is well established that the party seeking summary judgment bears the burden of demonstrating that no issues of material fact exist for trial. … immunity.

State v. Swanson

9 Ohio App. 2d 60 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 1967

It should be noted that the state made no attempt to qualify for admissibility defendant’s statement in any manner, nor did it contemplate its use for any purpose save impeachment. … A careful reading of this record clearly indicates several "instances from which we can assume that blood pressures rose on both sides.

State v. Fluharty

2012 Ohio 4258 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 2012

The delinquent child if not a public registry-qualified juvenile offender registrant shall provide the written notice at least twenty days prior to changing the residence address, and the offender and public registry-qualified … as a thirteenth juror and “in reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses, and determines whether in resolving conflicts in evidence the jury ‘clearly

State ex rel. AutoZone Stores, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.

209 N.E.3d 933 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 2, 2023

Howard, 167 Ohio St. 93, 96 (1957) ("It is well established that the legislature is presumed to have full knowledge of prior judicial decisions."). … So long as that causal link is established, and he or she is otherwise qualified, the claimant is eligible for TTD compensation. See R.C. 4123.56(A), (F); BF Goodrich at ¶ 12-14.

State v. Miller

2022 Ohio 2187 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2022

The trial court’s unduly harsh and excessive sentence was clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. {¶3} Miller’s sole assignment of error claims that her sentence was excessive based upon the record … aware that she could be sentenced to more than the four years recommended by the State at the time she entered her plea of guilty. {¶6} For all of the reasons discussed above, this Court finds that Miller has not established

State v. Jones

2026 Ohio 311 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 2, 2026

the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trial—they are not testimonial." … Nonetheless, unless it is established that a cell phone record is, in fact, a business record, the Confrontation Clause can operate to bar admission of the record.

Ostmann v. Ostmann

168 Ohio App. 3d 59 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2006

On June 18, 2004, the trial court entered a qualified domestic relations order that provided for the division of retirement benefits. … On July 14, 2004, Howard appealed to this court from the final judgment entry and qualified domestic relations order.

State v. Coleman, 2006-A-0075 (6-22-2007)

2007 Ohio 3204 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 22, 2007

The defendant argued there was nothing to establish these two blows would probably cause serious physical harm. The court held: "[T]he evidence clearly shows the blows were directed to the victim's face and head. … Blanchard was qualified to testify as an expert before she testified concerning Sara's injuries. Appellant does not dispute that Dr.

State v. Nichter

2016 Ohio 7268 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 11, 2016

the existence of legally sufficient provocation. {¶ 40} Finally, appellee has not cited any Ohio authority holding that an offender's dire financial straits and inability to afford monthly bills qualifies as provocation … This does not qualify as evidence relevant to his state of mind during the period he committed the offenses, much less clear and convincing evidence, as required by the standard of review under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2).

State ex rel. Tradesmen Internatl., L.L.C. v. Indus. Comm.

2022 Ohio 2935 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 23, 2022

that Linda was partially dependent upon him, but were sufficient to establish that Matthew was partially dependent. … Furthermore, the statute clearly sets forth that the commission has discretion to determine the period of time that the compensation will be received.

State v. Kraus, Ca2006-10-114 (11-13-2007)

2007 Ohio 6027 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 2007

Wilson was not qualified to testify as an expert. … Appellant's testimony about his service in Vietnam was clearly designed to sway the jurors' emotions in his favor, and, therefore, appellee was clearly entitled to rebut that evidence for the reasons previously mentioned.

Bennett v. Heidinger

30 Ohio App. 3d 267 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 1986

The defendant further informed Bennett that he would permit any qualified examiner of Bennett’s choice to meet with Heidinger and view and discuss the charts. … The testimony of both polygraphists clearly indicates that test charts prepared by one examiner are insufficient in and of themselves to form the basis of a second examiner’s opinion.

In Re Appeal of Anderson

29 Ohio App. 3d 248 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 1985

If this definition is the sole test, then clearly the board did not err in finding that the partnership was required to pay into the Unemployment Compensation Fund for the draw paid to the limited partners since the services … Payments for wages or other remuneration to a limited partner are, thus, not exempt from being considered employment for which contributions must be made, unless the payments qualify for exemption under R.C. 4141.01(B)(1)

State v. Collins

2026 Ohio 2212 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 2026

Metroparks also presented sufficient evidence as to the third element of speeding—that Ranger Dollard was qualified to use the device. … The state’s evidence was sufficient for the trial court to determine the officer was qualified to use the device and the device was functioning properly on the date of the citation.

Swearingen v. Waste Technologies Industries

134 Ohio App. 3d 702 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 21, 1999

Lewis, who is as qualified as his colleagues who were held to be qualified for admission, and who oversees his firm’s defense of the counterclaims.” … Appellants argue that the trial court erred in denying the admission of attorney Lewis in that he was allegedly qualified to represent appellants in regard to the counterclaims.