Case law

Corporate Partners, L.P. v. National Westminster Bank PLC

126 Ohio App. 3d 516 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 1998

Nat-West’s actions in preparing the PPM clearly qualify as transacting business in this state. … Appellants’ cause of action clearly arises from NatWest’s transaction of business in this state, i.e., preparation of the PPM.

State v. Puckett

191 Ohio App. 3d 747 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 2010

Plain error exists when the error is plain or obvious and when the error “affect[s] ‘substantial rights.’ ” The error affects substantial rights when “but for the error, ‘the outcome of the trial [proceeding] clearly would … Based on what the *757 mother saw, she testified that she talked to her family, which led to a call to police and a medical examination of the child by a qualified SANE nurse.”

State v. Black

2025 Ohio 5261 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 2025

We reject this argument because nothing in the record establishes that Black actually was in Cuyahoga Court custody, or was otherwise unavailable for sentencing, on November 26, 2024. … “on conditions of good behavior,” he might well be said to have committed the instant offenses while he was on probation. {¶ 29} Even assuming Black was not probation, however, he was clearly under several forms

State ex rel. Vonderheide v. Multi-Color Corp.

111 N.E.3d 773 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 3, 2018

At issue is whether the work Vonderheide performed at her family's farm qualifies as employment, such that she was a part of the active workforce immediately prior to the time for which she requested TTD compensation. … Furthermore, questions of credibility and the weight to be given evidence are clearly within the discretion of the commission as fact finder. State ex rel. Teece v. Indus.

In re Contempt of Christman

190 N.E.3d 1225 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 2022

There are people on the floor who are immune-compromised who cannot make antibodies. There is an Administrative Order requiring all people entering the building to wear a mask. … He pulled his mask down because he wanted the court to clearly hear his argument.

Rahal v. Liquor Control Comm.

1 Ohio App. 2d 263 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 1965

We express no opinion on whether this procedure qualifies under Regulation 61-B so as to exempt the agents from the requirements of Regulation 61-A. … Board of Liquor Control (1952), 64 Ohio Law Abs. 477 , are clearly distinguishable. Wallace involved a refusal to grant a renewal.

Dice v. White Family Companies, Inc.

173 Ohio App. 3d 472 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2007

Moreover, WFC and Wenrick clearly accepted the checks as “represented persons.” … Although there was no evidence of wrongdoing by WFC and Wenrick, we agree with the trial court that the evidence established that WFC and Wenrick obtained monies that clearly were not meant for them.

State ex rel. Sagallah v. Born

2014 Ohio 3106 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 2014

While Congress established these minimum standards, Congress left it to the states to implement the law. … Instead, the Act established minimum standards and left the manner of implementation to the states.

Markovich v. McKesson & Robbins, Inc.

106 Ohio App. 265 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 1958

First conceived of as an action in tort, the breach of the warranty representation, thus actionable, in no way qualified the buyer’s duty to receive, pay for and keep the goods. … Under these circumstances, the requirement of privity can be clearly understood.

In re L.V.

2024 Ohio 5917 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2024

“‘Clear and convincing evidence’ is evidence that ‘will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the allegations sought to be established.’” … As previously stated, the evidence clearly and convincingly showed that L.V. should not be placed with either parent within a reasonable time.

Ventura v. Ventura

2026 Ohio 981 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2026

Berish, 69 Ohio St.2d 318, 319-20 (1982) (“Part and parcel to establishing the proper termination date for a marriage is to consider the effect that date will have upon the equitable division of assets.”). … as an expert, but an owner of property may testify about its value without being so qualified.”

Rose v. Tievsky

2021 Ohio 3051 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 3, 2021

Rose clearly does not understand legal procedure, and, like most such litigants, finds the law difficult. … Failure to Recognize Civ.R. 56 Qualified Affidavit by Dr. Rose. {¶ 89} Under this assignment of error, Dr.

Saks v. Riga

2014 Ohio 4930 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 6, 2014

The qualified domestic-relations order preserves the asset so that each party can procure the most benefit. … Although Saks disputes this fact, the testimony at trial established that both parties attended law school during the marriage.

Ormond v. Rollingbrook Estates, Unpublished Decision (12-7-2000)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 2000

to immunity applies. … In that case, an exception to immunity applied under R.C. 2744.02 (B)(3), and none of the defenses and immunities under R.C. 2744.03 restored the political subdivision's immunity.

Miller v. Dendinger

2021 Ohio 546 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 1, 2021

Moreover, the record established that the parties’ dispute at the final hearing was limited to custody matters. … Kelcey testified that the conditions which qualified her for disability were injuries she suffered from an ATV accident and her depression.

In re L.R.

2019 Ohio 1152 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2019

. {¶14} In this case, the evidence established that Mother was residing in Lorain County when LCCS filed its complaints. … Mother, however, had not established a residence in Cuyahoga County.

State v. Highley

2023 Ohio 3569 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 2, 2023

Additionally, "the smell of marijuana, alone, by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to search a motor vehicle, pursuant to the automobile exception to the warrant … Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519, 2006-Ohio-3255 (reaffirming that the smell of [burnt] marijuana in the passenger compartment of a vehicle establishes probable cause for a warrantless search of the passenger

Jodka v. Toledo

232 N.E.3d 944 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 2023

The trial court did not address the parties’ arguments regarding the injunction or immunity. (April 24, 2023 Order.) … Appeals shall be heard through an administrative process established by the City of Toledo Police Department.

Haight v. Cheap Escape Co.

2014 Ohio 2447 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 2014

Deputy Clerk’s claims under Section 34a and R.C 4111.14(B) failed because, on their face, “[l]ike the FLSA, both § 34a and [R.C. 4111.14(B)] limit the scope of the minimum wage and overtime provisions to individuals who qualify … Further, the legislation being challenged will not be invalidated unless the challenger establishes that it is unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Citations omitted.) Arnold v.

State v. Preston

2012 Ohio 6176 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 2012

. {¶ 17} One of the established exceptions to the warrant requirement is when an officer's entry into a home is authorized by the voluntary consent of the occupant. … During the suppression hearing, Officer Hirsch clearly testified that he did not intend to search appellant's house for drugs, but that he simply wanted to speak to appellant regarding his failure to restrain his dog.