Case law

State v. Doane

69 Ohio App. 3d 638 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 1990

Thus, appellant has established a prima facie violation of the statute as to the four misdemeanor charges, since the ninety-day limit was exceeded by twenty days. … This argument is based upon appellant’s assertion that she was not qualified to act as her own counsel and, thus, was unable to competently protect her rights during the trial.

Timken Co. v. Lindley

29 Ohio App. 3d 181 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 1985

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has clearly spoken on the methodology to be used in analyzing these cases: “It has long been established, in cases dealing with R.C. 5739.01 exceptions to sales and use taxes, that this court … In view of the totality of evidence, his testimony clearly establishes that certain items were purchased by Timken for use directly in the production of tangible personal property for sale, and thus merited exception from

State v. Holmes

77 Ohio App. 3d 582 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 2, 1991

The portions sought to be admitted (1) must be relevant to the issues and (2) only those parts which qualify or explain the subject matter of the portion offered by the opponent need be admitted.” … Thus, there was clearly not a blanket prohibition imposed concerning the playing of other portions of the tape.

Cattrill v. Wayne Mutual, Unpublished Decision (9-21-2005)

2005 Ohio 4937 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 21, 2005

In granting summary judgment, the court stated the issue clearly: "Therefore, [it is undisputed that] the City and the tortfeasor police officer fall within the purview of O.R.C. § 3937.18 (B)(5), which defines an `uninsured … government compelled charity: Wayne Mutual has money so it should have to pay the Cottrills, who want money. {¶ 13} Of course, the Cottrills ignore the basic premise of contract law, which allows two independent parties to establish

Domer v. Joan, 2006ap100057 (12-14-2007)

2007 Ohio 6877 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 14, 2007

Clearly, it was in error as the testimony was offered for the truth of the matter asserted and qualified as hearsay. Appellant's testimony was very limited and merely denied giving appellee money or her property. … It was not offered to establish a fact or issue in question. Appellee did not deny that he had some of appellant's items. The testimony was also presented to establish Ms.

Hardrives Paving & Construction, Inc. v. City of Niles

99 Ohio App. 3d 243 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 1994

For a writ of mandamus to issue, appellant was required to establish that it had a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, that appellee was under a clear legal duty to perform the acts and that appellant had no plain … Clearly, the decision to award the contract to Gennaro was based on such criteria because the additional streets were not part of the bid specifications.

Miller v. Barry

81 Ohio App. 3d 393 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 16, 1992

Appellant contends that appellee *397 did not offer any evidence to establish these necessary elements of the statutory definition. … However, courts have recognized that wear and tear caused by extraordinary repetitive motion may qualify as an occupational disease. See Gresham v. Gen.

Church at Warren v. Warzala

2017 Ohio 6947 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 24, 2017

Implied consent is established where it appears “the parties understood the evidence was aimed at the unpleaded issue.” State ex rel. Evans v. Bainbridge Twp. … Rather, appellant claims it qualifies as a legal entity under R.C. 1745.08. {¶25} An unincorporated nonprofit association “is a legal entity distinct from its members and managers” that “has the same powers as an

State v. Chandler

2016 Ohio 164 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 2016

agency, and establish an intervention plan for the offender.” … Chandler] clearly has entered a plea in that other case in Medina County and  5 been convicted in that regard, * * * the [ILC] statute is still available to her and she does

Reising v. Reising

2012 Ohio 1097 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 2012

The court continued: “While it is true that in many cases this Court does utilize a coverture formula when allocating property rights between the parties as they may relate to pension entitlements, it clearly … Upon review of the MQCO, we agree with the trial court that the divorce decree did not establish a coverture formula for the award of Donna’s military retirement benefits and that the MQCO was merely a clarification – not

Stutz v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Serv.

2017 Ohio 7287 · 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.

In Re Estate of Osborne

166 Ohio App. 3d 732 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2006

Thus, we reject his argument that he is somehow immune to discovery because he is a beneficiary or because his objections to the account did not render this an adversarial proceeding. … The Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure apply to proceedings in the probate division of common pleas courts except to the extent that they are clearly inapplicable. Civ.R. 73(A).

Dorsey v. Federal Insurance

154 Ohio App. 3d 568 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2003

It has already been established that CORSA is not subject to Ohio’s insurance laws, including R.C. 3937.18. See, e.g., Ohio Govt. Risk Mgt. … Page 5 of the CORSA policy clearly states that the definition of “assured” applies “wherever used in this Insurance.”

State v. Fleming

2023 Ohio 961 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2023

This Court determined that the “State’s evidence established that Fleming was in possession of a single baggie containing a small amount of drugs when he was pulled over by a Springfield police officer on April 15th. … the record as to the value [it] placed on certain prior offenses that justify this decision, [it] must state on the record some justification for making that finding that includes at a minimum the mere existence of a qualifying

Landskroner v. Landskroner

154 Ohio App. 3d 471 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 18, 2003

Although captioned as an “Agreement,” there is nothing within this document that establishes that a contract had been made. … Injunctive Relief {¶ 36} According to the complaint, LLF established its own website in April 2002 separate and apart from that of appellant’s.

Protzman v. Painesville, Unpublished Decision (6-1-2005)

2005 Ohio 3404 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 2005

In other words, appellant is claiming that Cox made promises to issue a building permit for what is clearly an impermissible use. … Accordingly, political subdivision immunity acts as a bar to appellant's claim against appellee.

State v. Eicholtz

2013 Ohio 302 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 1, 2013

The State’s evidence established that several other people were present in the home. … This testimony supports a finding that his statements to her about what he had seen qualified as excited utterances.

State v. Weller

246 N.E.3d 747 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 3, 2024

He explained that he had been granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony. … Vacancy or non-use, alone, does not establish abandonment. State v. Strait, 5th Dist. Ashland No. 15-COA-043, 2016-Ohio-7200, ¶ 22.

Nicholas v. Yellow Cab Co.

116 Ohio App. 402 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 17, 1962

These instructions concerned the duty required of a party to an action in negligence where the evidence tends to establish a “sudden emergency” and the law relating to the obligation of a driver of a motor vehicle not to … As to the second specification of negligence (No. 3 above), there is no legal duty imposed upon the defendant to exercise “the highest degree of care” that is not qualified by the condition that the exercise of such care

Flowers v. City of Whitehall, Unpublished Decision (8-1-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2002

." * * * The [reviewing] court * * * weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the [finder of fact] clearly lost … Dorman (1994), 33 F.3d 472 , 477 ("In suits alleging illegal arrest, the qualified immunity determination turns on whether `a reasonable officer could have believed [the arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established