Case law

In re S.C-N.

2022 Ohio 3064 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 1, 2022

The court first determines by clear and convincing evidence that one of five possible statutory grounds in R.C. 2151.414(B)(1) is established. … The court found clear and convincing evidence established the four R.C. 2151.414(D)(2) factors in this case. (Jgmt. Entry at 28.)

State ex rel. McCormack v. Ashtabula Cty. Med. Ctr.

2025 Ohio 5151 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 2025

Furthermore, the Hearing Officer finds that to qualify for relief pursuant to R.C. 4123.522, a party must establish that [they] did not have actual knowledge of the import … Kroger Co., 2005-Ohio-3560, ¶ 9 (stating that R.C. 4123.512 “clearly contemplates the general nonappealability of commission orders and, in the case of claims for initial allowance, withholding judicial review until after

Krumm, Exr. v. Cuneo

71 Ohio App. 521 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 11, 1943

Welsh, J., then continues as follows: “These and like cases are clearly distinguishable from the present one. … This rule is applied, however, only where it clearly appears that the first beneficiary is to get an absolute interest.

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Wood

35 Ohio App. 224 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1929

Kingman as executor, who thereafter qualified as such and duly gave bond. … As such executor Kingman brought an action in the court of common pleas of Morrow county to have decedent’s will construed and the several trust beneficiaries designated and the amount of their respective trust estates established

State v. Burns

2011 Ohio 3056 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 2011

No. 83541, 2004-Ohio-4632, ¶ 11, (finding that CMSD is a political subdivision for the purposes of the political subdivision immunity statute). {¶ 19} Furthermore, the jury found Burns guilty of theft in office … It is “a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by, and clearly against reason and evidence.

State v. Brennco, Inc.

2015 Ohio 467 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 9, 2015

Yet, the only reading of the statute, clearly and unambiguously dictates that the monetary limits do not apply to criminal cases where there is no “amount claimed by any party” to be limited. … If the legislative intent is clearly expressed, “ ‘the statute may not be restricted, constricted, qualified, narrowed, enlarged or abridged; significance and effect should, if possible, be accorded to every word, phrase

Foremost Insurance v. Motorists Mutual Insurance

167 Ohio App. 3d 198 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 2006

. {¶ 10} It is well established that the party seeking summary judgment bears the burden of demonstrating that no issues of material fact exist for trial. Celotex Corp. v. … The motorcycle qualifies as a temporary substitute for the covered auto because the BMW’s battery was dead.

In re E.B.

2025 Ohio 1999 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 2025

for manifest weight, the appellate court must weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of the witnesses, and determine whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the finder of fact clearly … Though father Nos. 24AP-474 & 24AP-490 17 did not clearly communicate his difficulties in obtaining housing to the caseworker, we urge FCCS, going forward,

State v. Barnett

2019 Ohio 3944 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2019

Under such circumstances, we find the statements have the requisite degree of trustworthiness to qualify as excited utterances. … Also, this is not the case in which the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be overturned and a new trial ordered.

Alcala v. Autullo, Unpublished Decision (9-28-2007)

2007 Ohio 5309 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2007

On January 27, 2006, appellants took Autullo's deposition, wherein it was established that Autullo was an employee of the city, was not on an emergency call, was not on a frolic or detour, and was acting in the course and … Autullo opposed appellants' request to file an amended complaint on the basis that the city was "clearly discoverable prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations."

Watkins v. Alwishah

2021 Ohio 3589 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 30, 2021

The condition of the frame as indicated in the state inspection as well as the photographs clearly establishes such severe rust damage could not have occurred in the short period of time from sale … As the trial court noted, “[t]he condition of the frame as indicated in the state inspection as well as the photographs clearly establishes such severe rust damage could not have occurred in the short period of time from

State Ex Rel. Dwyer v. City of Middletown

52 Ohio App. 3d 87 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 1988

This contract, we conclude, shows he is clearly not entitled to be reinstated as ap-pellee’s chief of police as we shall now proceed to explain. … decision in Williams and held an action in mandamus is maintainable by a reinstated public employee to recover compensation due him for any period of wrongful exclusion from employment provided the amount recoverable is established

Cleveland Mun. School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision

162 N.E.3d 1281 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 25, 2020

(“First American”) as a qualified intermediary for the Gelb companies. James Romano (“Romano”) signed the statement on behalf of HEC. … To establish that a membership transfer is actually a sale of property, the BTA relies on “purchase agreements and other contracts of the parties.” Id. at p. 2.

Ragias v. Ohio Real Estate Commission

29 Ohio App. 3d 40 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1986

The court, therefore, held that Moye *42 qualified under former R.C. 4735.07(E)(2), which permitted a person to qualify as a broker applicant if he had “at least two years’ experience full time in a real estate business or … “(C) Where the experience of an applicant substantially complies with, but is clearly not subject to the definition of ‘real estate transaction’ as set forth in this rule, the superintendent may recommend that the information

Republic Steel Corp. v. Hailey

30 Ohio App. 3d 103 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 1986

Green (1973), 411 U.S. 792 , the Supreme Court established standards and procedures for evaluating discriminatory discharge claims. First, the complainant must establish a prima fade case of sex discrimination. … Nor does she contend that this employer regularly discriminated against women employees, and the record clearly denies such a conclusion.

State v. Crawford

2021 Ohio 547 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 1, 2021

‘The standard for plain error is whether, but for the error, the outcome of the proceeding clearly would have been otherwise.’ State v. … Third Assignment of Error {¶22} Crawford argues that the trial court erred by ordering him to pay restitution to a governmental entity that does not qualify as a victim.

Anousheh v. Planet Ford, Inc., 21960 (8-31-2007)

2007 Ohio 4543 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 31, 2007

Planet Ford first claimed that the instructions should have contained a provision stating that the "plaintiff must establish, not only the element of fraud, but that the fraud was aggravated by the existence of malice or … R. 702(B) and the issue of whether Betzler, Brocker and Willett were qualified to testify.

State v. Howard

2025 Ohio 273 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 30, 2025

The court further noted that testimony had been presented at trial by two conflicting experts who were both “highly qualified, experienced, and well respected in their fields.” … reviewing a manifest weight challenge, an appellate court “‘weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly

Parsell v. Martinez, 7-07-16 (3-10-2008)

2008 Ohio 1008 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2008

Martinez asserts that the statute establishes the burden of proof in a medical malpractice claim, and this litigation is simply an action on an account. … Clearly, a dentist cannot be the plaintiff of a "dental claim," and in this case, Parsell, the dentist, was the plaintiff.

Adams v. Morrison

90 Ohio App. 387 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 1951

It has not been suggested that the captains or majors occupying these other positions within that rank or grade are any less qualified by their experience to discharge the duties of Police Chief than the Superintendent of … If it had been shown that the experience as superintendent of the crime bureau was entirely different from that of other captains or majors, and that such experience was clearly such as to give him greater qualifications