Case law

Village of Bay v. Gelvick

58 Ohio App. 51 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 1937

under and pursuant to the laws of the state of Ohio. ‘‘ The plaintiff further says that pursuant to authority granted by law to it, the plaintiff, acting by and through its' duly constituted Planning Commission and its duly qualified … The legal relations of the various defendants to the city and of the city to the defendants are clearly affected by the ordinance in question, and, the legal relations of the city being thus affected, it clearly comes within

First Union-Lehman Bros.-Bank of Am. Commercial Mtge. Trust v. Pillar Real Estate Advisors, Inc.

2014 Ohio 1105 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 2014

The trial court found that First Union had failed to seek the substitution within the time allowed by Civ.R. 25(A), and had failed to establish excusable neglect. … Franklin No. 12AP-62, 2012-Ohio-4508, ¶ 5. {¶ 16} In finding that First Union failed to establish excusable neglect, the trial court stated: The Ohio Revised Code clearly allows a creditor

Kacsmarik v. Lakefront Lines Arena

2011 Ohio 2553 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 26, 2011

”  7 {¶ 9} Contrary to the trial court’s conclusion, the record clearly reveals how the subject benches came into being. … Caskey is critical of MCG Architects for failing to consult with a functional analyst such as himself, he does not and apparently, is not qualified to testify that a licensed architect fails to exercise reasonable care

State v. Hardin

2024 Ohio 2943 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 2, 2024

To facilitate the scheme, appellant falsely represented himself to members of the public as a qualified, licensed funeral director. He was not. … Appellant did not appeal the balance of the convictions. {¶ 20} The record clearly shows that extensive, unrefuted testimony was given at trial from multiple detectives with the Columbus Police Department, a Lucas

State v. Miller

2026 Ohio 2141 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 8, 2026

Hoskins was not “unavailable” for purposes of Evid.R. 804(B)(3). {¶39} Specifically, Miller argues that Hoskins should have qualified as an “unavailable” witness under Evid.R. 804(A)(5). … He claims that the record established that Hoskins had been subpoenaed by the State but Hoskins did not appear at trial.

Niepsuj v. Doe

2015 Ohio 3864 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 23, 2015

Accordingly, in many instances, “[a]n affidavit from the defendant attorney is a legally sufficient basis upon which to grant a motion for summary judgment absent an opposing affidavit of a qualified expert witness for … Clearly, an ordinary lay person would not have that knowledge. {¶21} After the passage of the September 5, 2014 deadline for identifying his expert witness, appellant filed a notice in which he specifically stated

Lipps v. Kash, Ca2007-05-060 (6-2-2008)

2008 Ohio 2628 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 2, 2008

Saturn, a personal passenger vehicle, does not qualify as a "commercial car" as contemplated by R.C. 4501.01 (J). … Just because the vehicle could theoretically carry merchandise or freight does not mean that it qualifies as a "commercial car."

State v. Williams

2013 Ohio 573 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2013

Williams asserted at trial and on appeal that the missing money and the fact that Morgan was throwing items at him qualified as “serious provocation” that was “reasonably sufficient” to put him in a sudden fit of rage. … This revocation of permission and privilege established the trespass element of burglary.

Mitchell v. Lemmie, 21511 (10-26-2007)

2007 Ohio 5757 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2007

When Mitchell asked if he was going to get the job, because he was the only candidate left and had been told he was qualified, Seege said that no decision had been made yet. … In explaining why an affirmative action plan would be considered direct evidence, the Eleventh Circuit noted that: *Page 31 {¶ 107} "Statements by decisionmakers clearly evincing discriminatory intent and obviating the need

State v. Keith, 1-06-46 (9-10-2007)

2007 Ohio 4632 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2007

Specifically, Keith asserts that Officer Hammond was not qualified as an expert in order to testify about the procedures and results of the AFIS. … Therefore, even if there was error in admitting the disputed testimony, it was clearly not prejudicial to Keith, as he was found not guilty, even though he was identified in the videotape as one of the robbers of Lynn's.

Workman v. Carlisle Engineered Prod., Unpublished Decision (1-23-2003)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 2003

Selander, 85 Ohio St.3d at 546 . {¶ 23} Because Cincinnati's Umbrella policy provides coverage "in excess of the `underlying insurance,'" it also qualifies as a motor vehicle liability policy. 6 As established, the underlying … However, we find that in order to justify cross-applying such provisions to insurance arising by operation of law, the terms must clearly establish an intent to apply such provisions to any and all coverages afforded under

State v. Sanchez

2020 Ohio 5470 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2020

Wasilewski has not established that his trial counsel had a loyalty or interest toward F.D. {¶72} In addition, Mr. … Based on what can be clearly seen in those photographs with the child and the photographs that I obtained of Mr.

State v. Rayle

2025 Ohio 1912 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 22, 2025

So each sentence was clearly within the range of appropriate sentences. … First, appellant must establish that counsel's performance has fallen below an objective standard of reasonable representation. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); State v.

Career & Technical Assn. v. Auburn Vocational School Dist. Bd. of Edn.

194 N.E.3d 782 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 8, 2022

Schultz was involved in establishing the Eighth Period Stipend. Mr. … a reasonable period of time as a fixed and established practice accepted by both parties.”

Davis v. Widman

184 Ohio App. 3d 705 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 2009

The trial court’s viewing that scene and its related factual findings are clearly evidence outside the face of the complaint, which, again, is inappropriate for Civ.R. 12(B)(6) purposes. … Although Davis set forth facts establishing causation and damages, she failed to allege a duty and corresponding breach, which caused the damages.

Furnier v. Drury

163 Ohio App. 3d 793 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 10, 2004

Drury, and Drury’s employer, defendant-appellee Qualified Emergency Specialists, Inc. … To the contrary, we held in the prior appeal that Furnier had presented substantial competent evidence to establish a prima facie case of medical malpractice. {¶ 13} Defense counsel’s remarks were clearly designed to arouse

In re G.R.F.

2019 Ohio 3320 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2019

However, when considering the two entries together, as intended by the juvenile court, Mother's parenting time was clearly addressed and established, including the schedule to be followed for holidays, summertime, and … Mother again disputes the authority of the juvenile court to find her in contempt where no court order qualified her right to relocate, and therefore, she was not prohibited from moving without notice. {¶ 44} The

State v. Bunkley

2020 Ohio 6675 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 14, 2020

Bunkley has not established that the jury clearly lost its way and created a manifest miscarriage of justice in its credibility determinations and weighing of the evidence. {¶7} (4) Finally, since we do not find … regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified

Lewis v. Prosecuting Atty of Columbiana Cty, Unpublished Decision (9-5-2006)

2006 Ohio 4685 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 5, 2006

Appellees raised issues of political subdivision immunity and that the victim's rights statute clearly prohibits liability based on a prosecutor's failure to satisfy its statutory obligations. … However, Appellant must first establish that she raised a potentially viable claim under Section 1983 that alleges a violation of her federal rights.

Williams v. Buckeye State Bldg & Loan Co.

19 Ohio Law. Abs. 403 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 1935

May 6, 1918, S. made an assignment for benefit of creditors and. the assignee qualified May 8, 1918. The assignee was made a party defendant in the foreclosure suit. … Our attention has also been directed to the case of Dwyer et v Garlough et, reported in 31 Oh St, at pqge 158: “The existence of the rule contended for is clearly established.