Case law

State v. Ramey

2021 Ohio 1522 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 2021

Walker’s neighbor, Sherry Miller, even testified that the two vehicles were clearly moving together. … Even if we were to find that Ramey was unavoidably prevented from timely raising his equal-protection claim due to the timing of the sentencing decision in Heizer, Ramey has not clearly and convincingly established a constitutional

Carter v. State

4 Ohio App. 193 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 1915

as saying that it is necessary to use the language above quoted, or any particular words, to express the rule governing such cases, but only to say that it is necessary in such cases as this that such instruction be *197 clearly … He was permitted to give his conclusions of fact as to the origin of the fire upon the theory that he had qualified as an expert upon this subject.

State Ex Rel. Meyers v. Ohio State Lottery Commission

34 Ohio App. 3d 232 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 1986

However, it is a general rule of law that the state may only be sued in accordance withlegislation which clearly expresses the state’s consent to be sued. … A general waiver of sovereign immunity from liability such as that contained in R.C. 2743.02 does not subject the state to a garnishment proceeding.

State v. Harris

2024 Ohio 5807 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 2024

Notably, the trial court failed to impose a non-life indefinite sentence for the qualifying first-degree felony. … Gwynne, 2019-Ohio-4761, ¶ 17 (holding that “R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 both clearly apply only to individual sentences.” (Emphasis deleted.)).

Toledo Area Private Industry Council v. Steinbacher

41 Ohio App. 3d 39 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 1987

Pursuant to guidelines established by the administrator, appellant administers a summer youth employment program (“SYEP”) which can operate only be-' tween May 1 and September 30. … The work performed by the supervisors is clearly not controlled by climatic conditions.

Laurenzi v. Dept. of Transp., 07ap-54 (10-4-2007)

2007 Ohio 5344 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 4, 2007

The Court of Claims Act permits plaintiff to proceed against ODOT with a lawsuit that would have been terminated at common law on the grounds of ODOT's defense of sovereign immunity. … In order to prevail on his negligence claim, plaintiff must establish "the existence of a duty, the breach of the duty, and injury resulting proximately therefrom." Strother v.

In Re Galloway

77 Ohio App. 3d 61 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 6, 1991

Farrar qualify under Evid.R. 803(4) and, therefore, the trial court did not err in admitting that testimony over appellant's objection. … While the Juvenile Rules were enacted pursuant to Article IV of the Ohio Constitution to establish a uniform procedure for the courts of Ohio, they do not affect the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts as established by statute

Miazga v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 18

2 Ohio App. 2d 153 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 1964

The court correctly held this statute is one dealing with procedure and did not provide that an unincorporated association was a legal entity for substantive purposes nor establish a rule permitting actions at law against … This case and the article by Professor Crane (cited supra) are in complete accord with the legal trend of today in meeting and overruling the restriction based on earlier cases granting immunity from legal responsibility

State v. Johnson

2014 Ohio 4032 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2014

And “reversal is warranted only if the outcome of the trial clearly would have been different absent the error.” Id., quoting State v. … The evidence at trial established a foundation for Appellant’s knowledge and Gallia App.

Rowe v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

69 Ohio App. 291 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 14, 1941

Sec. 11604 GC, governs procedure in Common Pleas Court and is as follows: “All judgments and orders must be entered on the journal of the court, and specify clearly the relief granted or order made in the action. … That a deputy clerk could be delegated by statute to qualify sureties can not be doubted.

In re N.L.

2015 Ohio 4165 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 2015

. {¶7} By July 2012, CSB established a voluntary case plan with the parents. … Clear and convincing evidence is that which is sufficient to produce in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established. Cross v.

State v. Ramsden-Cooke

2024 Ohio 4833 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 2024

As mentioned above, any right or privilege in the property beyond the established legal ownership needed to be determined in a civil action to establish those rights. … Privilege is "an immunity, license, or right conferred by law, bestowed by express or implied grant, arising out of status, position, office, or relationship, or growing out of necessity." R.C. 2901.12(A)(12).

State v. Podborny

41 Ohio App. 3d 135 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 2, 1987

Thereafter the undersigned and qualified regular panel of judges of this court of appeals was assigned this matter. … Batson clearly holds that in order to establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination in the selection of a jury, the defendant must show that he is a member of a racial group which is capable of being singled out

In Re: Proposed Charter Petition

2018 Ohio 3269 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 8, 2018

. {¶4} Pursuant to Ohio R.C. 307.94, the Committee requested a hearing in the Athens County Common Pleas Court to establish the validity or invalidity of the county charter petition. … powers, privileges, immunities, or other duties conflict with the rights of people or nature.”

State v. Hannah

2015 Ohio 4438 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 2015

Clearly, the sentence is within the statutory sentencing range. … Accordingly, appellate courts can find an "abuse of discretion" where the record establishes that a trial judge refused or failed to consider statutory sentencing factors. Cincinnati v.

Perrucci v. Whittington

118 N.E.3d 311 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 2018

I just want the Court to be mindful that again this individual has not been classified or qualified as an expert witness. … “Sani Home’s is a company that I run, that had a bank account established.” Question, “just for this project, or for your construction projects?”

Springfield City v. Saunders

118 Ohio App. 59 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 11, 1962

On the other hand, the defendants argue that they must be members of the Air National Guard to qualify for employment as air technicians, and that their income from both sources, therefore, is military pay. … For this reason, one claiming an exemption must affirmatively establish his right thereto. See National Tube Co. v. Glander, Tax Commr., et al., 157 Ohio St., 407 ; Goldman v. Robert E.

Cheriki v. Black River Industries, 07ca009230 (5-30-2008)

2008 Ohio 2602 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 30, 2008

"To qualify as an expert, the witness must have some `specialized knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education regarding the subject matter of the testimony'. … Cheriki's employment, Black River was the employer for purposes of the immunity from suit conferred by R.C. 4123.74 .

Brannon v. Rinzler

77 Ohio App. 3d 749 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 1991

George, supra, and stated that in order to qualify as a security, the investor could not have the right to exercise any managerial control. … However, these documents were considered and reviewed to the extent that facts stated therein were corroborative of a fact established by other permissible evidence.

State v. Steinman

79 Ohio App. 3d 246 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 1992

“The United States Constitution does not require that this court install a procedural safety valve which would permit criminal defendants to sit idly by at trial and during its preparation and which would decimate established … We do not find that the results clearly would have been different had the prosecutor not made this improper remark.