Case law

Folberth v. Folberth

2022 Ohio 3384 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2022

Therefore, due to the evidence Husband produced, the record does not clearly establish how much income reported was capital gains income. … However, the trial court's entry clearly states that it retained jurisdiction over the amount of spousal support.

Jackson v. State

172 N.E.3d 461 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 2021

The cause of action created by the legislature in R.C. 2743.48 constitutes a waiver of the immunity from civil liability that is normally retained by the state. Bundy v. … Without the enactment of R.C. 2743.38, the state would remain immune from such lawsuits. Id.

State ex rel. Glover v. Industrial Commission

27 Ohio Law. Abs. 506 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 2, 1938

We perceive no reason why the relator, with full knowledge of her rights and represented by qualified counsel, should not waive her right to proceed further on her application for rehearing and dismiss her claim. … It is essential to mandamus that the obligation of the respondent to act as prayed in the petition clearly appear. The relator has not met this burden of prooof and the writ must therefore be denied.

State v. Bricher

2024 Ohio 394 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2024

manifest weight of the evidence, we review the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses, and determine whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly … Yet, we agree with Bricher that any fentanyl-related incidents—including the one on May 12, 2022—cannot qualify as “corrupt activity” under the statute.

State v. Jordan

2022 Ohio 2708 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 2022

Plain error exists when “but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. … This testimony was clearly relevant and helpful in assisting the jury to understand A.J.'s behavior.

State ex rel. Osborne v. N. Canton

2019 Ohio 1744 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 6, 2019

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE WATER BOARD WAS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE AND AUTHORIZED BY CHARTER. … “[I]f such intent is clearly expressed therein, the statute may not be restricted, constricted, qualified, narrowed, enlarged or abridged.” State ex rel. McGraw v. Gorman, 17 Ohio St.3d 147, 149 (1985).

State v. Fletcher

2017 Ohio 9207 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2017

II, 315-316. {¶36} Appellee’s uncontroverted evidence established appellant was at Clancy’s Pub on April 4, April 11, May 27, June 5, July 31, and October 9. … She was actively, repeatedly, serving patrons of the establishment. State ex rel. AT & T, Inc. v. McGraw, 120 Ohio St.3d 1, 2008-Ohio-5246, 895 N.E.2d 842, ¶ 23.

Stutz v. Ohio Dep't of Job & Family Servs.

96 N.E.3d 963 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2017

(1) The individual may rebut the presumption established under paragraph (C) of this rule. … And since Stutz contests the Agency’s -12- Case No. 15-17-02 valuation process, Administrative Appeal No. 1852060 is clearly distinguishable.

State v. Hill-Bryant

2024 Ohio 962 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 2024

The trial court committed plain error by permitting the state’s witness to testify as an expert without having been qualified under Evid.R. 702(C). IV. … be qualified under Evid.R. 702.” State v. Primeau, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 97901, 2012-Ohio-5172, ¶ 74, citing State v. McKee, 91 Ohio St.3d 292, 744 N.E.2d 737 (2001).

Bennett v. Sunnywood Land Dev., 06ca0089-M (5-7-2007)

2007 Ohio 2154 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 7, 2007

Rather, the decision must fly in the face of clearly established legal precedent. … Amaddio's decision that Appellant was negligent "`fl[ies] in the face of clearly established legal precedent[.]'"

King Painting & Wallpapering, Inc. v. Aswin Ganapathy Hospitality Assocs., L.L.C.

2014 Ohio 1372 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2014

. {¶32} Civ.R. 36(B) provides: “Any matter admitted under this Rule is conclusively established unless the court on motion permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission.” … Sammy conceded that she is the “managing owner” of Aswin and that Aswin owns the motel, she clearly had authority to contract on behalf of Aswin. {¶66} We therefore hold the trial court did not err in granting summary

State v. Burch, 22478 (10-3-2008)

2008 Ohio 5161 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 3, 2008

At approximately 3:30 a.m. on July 8, Howard and King went to an "after party" at the Posse Motorcycle Club, an establishment frequented by individuals from several motorcycle groups. {¶ 4} Howard first saw Burch at the Posse … "Contrastingly, the decision as to which of several competing inferences, suggested by the evidence in the record, should be preferred, is a matter in which an appellate judge is at least equally qualified, by reason *Page

Ohio Edison Co. v. Ohio Department of Transportation

86 Ohio App. 3d 189 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 2, 1993

Claims for money damages against the state are clearly within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Claims. Boggs v. State (1983), 8 Ohio St.3d 15 , 8 OBR 84, 455 N.E.2d 1286 . … This would defeat the intent of the Court of Claims Act generally to establish the Court of Claims as the court of exclusive jurisdiction for claims against the state.

State v. Long

2021 Ohio 2672 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 2021

As amended by the Reagan Tokes Act, the Ohio Revised Code’s sentences for first and second degree qualifying felonies violates the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Ohio, and constitutes … No. 20CA9 11 (b) That the sentence is otherwise contrary to law. {¶26} We may vacate or modify a felony sentence if we clearly and convincingly

In Re: The S Children

2018 Ohio 2961 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 2018

Immediately before ruling on the motion, the court stated that it was going “to determine whether or not the state has met its burden of producing sufficient evidence to clearly and convincingly establish that these children … Having established our standard of review, we address the merits of this appeal.

George v. Cleveland Trust Co.

22 Ohio App. 1 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 1926

The important and qualifying words of Section 11014 are: ‘If it [the court] considers this necessary.’ … The distinction sought to be established between foreign guardians of minors and foreign guardians of imbeciles, etc., is not tenable.

State ex rel. Ames v. Portage County Bd. of Commrs.

2022 Ohio 2543 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2022

Summit No. 20889, 2002-Ohio-2905, ¶ 28 (where the motion “clearly alleg[ed] that S & S and/or its counsel engaged in frivolous conduct by filing and pursuing its claim * * * in the name of a corporation [they] knew lacked … Courts must read words and phrases in context and construe them in accordance with rules of grammar and common usage and may not restrict, constrict, qualify, narrow, enlarge, or

12701 Shaker Blvd. Co. v. City of Cleveland

31 Ohio App. 2d 199 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 1972

This establishes the jurisdiction of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Cleveland (see fn. 8, infra). … The record reveals no effort to qualify it. 15 Section 2506.04, Ohio Revised Code.

State Ex Rel. Grien v. Ohio State Highway Patrol Retirement System

171 Ohio App. 3d 406 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 15, 2007

The board shall determine whether the member qualifies for disability retirement and its decision shall be final. … Such a result clearly does not comport with the scheme created by the General Assembly which established a separate and independent agency to oversee and manage the school employees retirement funds under R.C.

In re J.L.H.

2014 Ohio 2376 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 2, 2014

THE PROBATE COURTS DETERMINATION IS IN CONTRADICTION TO THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE, WHICH CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THERE WAS INDEED 'SIGNIFICANT INTERFERENCE AND/OR DISCOURAGEMENT … The Ohio Supreme Court emphasized that monetary gifts to the child do not qualify as support because they are not payments as required by law or judicial decree as R.C. 3107.07(A) requires.