Case law

Moe v. Yost

2025 Ohio 914 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 2025

The Guidelines provide that all youth with gender dysphoria should be evaluated, diagnosed, and treated by a qualified healthcare professional. … Accord L.W., 83 F.4th at 511 (White, J., dissenting) (“Clearly, . . .

Akron v. Schaffer

2026 Ohio 2017 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 29, 2026

This Court applies a de novo standard of review to questions of law and a clearly erroneous standard of review to questions of fact. … Notably, however, this Court concluded that “such pro se motions still qualify as tolling events under R.C. 2945.72(E) for purposes of calculating speedy trial time.” Hill at ¶ 11.

State v. Truitt

2011 Ohio 6599 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2011

Blakemore (1983), 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219. {¶31} At trial, Truitt objected to the admission of the DNA evidence arguing that the State failed to establish the chain of custody. … Further, the trial court concluded that Weiss was qualified to testify “considering his background, training, experiences as an expert witness and other factors that he was qualified as an expert in DNA.”

Jefferson v. Creveling, 24206 (3-18-2009)

2009 Ohio 1214 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 2009

This order in no way prevented Jefferson from noticing Bauer's deposition or obtaining an affidavit from Bauer to support or refute his claim. {¶ 23} Moreover, even assuming Creveling made this statement, Creveling was immune … Kotten (1975), 43 Ohio St.2d 237 , 244 , the Supreme Court discussed the nature of a qualified privilege as follows: "`A qualified or conditionally privileged communication is one made in good faith on any subject matter

In re De.R.

2024 Ohio 1183 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2024

McCarty was not identified as an expert witness, Mother maintains that she could not qualify to testify in that capacity. {¶11} During the permanency trial, Ms. … Regarding Da.R., the evidence established that he was placed in HCJFS care three days after his birth, and at the time of the hearing, he had been in the custody of HCJFS for 11 months. {¶33} Thereafter, the court

Peters v. Densmore

75 Ohio Law. Abs. 306 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 1955

Defendant contends that “the plaintiff does attempt to contradict his statement by attemping to qualify and negative that portion which states that so far as he knew he was not injured.” … With reference to the claimed error of cross-examination of plaintiff by defendant relative to other accidents prior and subsequent to the collision under consideration in our opinion the defendant was entitled to establish

State v. Stacy, Ca2006-02-021 (12-17-2007)

2007 Ohio 6744 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 17, 2007

This requires a finding that "but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been different." Davis at ¶ 17, citing State v. Long (1978), *Page 4 53 Ohio St.2d 91 ; State v. … To establish recklessness, the state must show that the abuse was perpetrated with heedless indifference to the consequences of the action.

Staton v. Henry, Unpublished Decision (4-27-1998)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 1998

Among other allegations, the complaint alleged that Miami University and its officers and employees failed to follow established procedures in determining Staton's qualifications for tenure and thus denied Staton his procedural … "In providing that an election to sue the state in the Court of Claims results in a complete waiver of any cognate cause of action, against individual state officers or employees, the Ohio legislature clearly provided for

Nye v. Ohio Board of Examiners of Architects

165 Ohio App. 3d 502 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 2, 2006

More specifically, in Hicks, the city sought to argue that it had immunity from liability because Cincinnati General Hospital was a state-owned facility. … Considering those facts, the Supreme Court in Hicks held that when a party defendant clearly had its day in court on the specific issue brought into litigation within the later proceeding, the nonparty plaintiff could rely

In re D.A.

2022 Ohio 1359 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 25, 2022

More specifically, he contends that the State did not, and effectively could not, establish that D.A. … The story appears to clearly be true and have occurred. The witness is very credible in the court[’]s eyes.

Wamsley v. Verina, 2008-T-0031 (11-14-2008)

2008 Ohio 5949 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 2008

The bond clearly states that State Auto agrees to be "held and firmly bound" to the Board in the "penal sum" of $20,000 under the terms of the bond. … In that regard, there are several key factual issues that are not necessarily established by the record before us. {¶ 27} First, it is not entirely clear who drafted the language at issue.

State v. Perry

29 Ohio App. 2d 33 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 1972

The court erred in overruling the appellant’s motion for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the state’s evidence on the grounds that the state failed to establish a case which would present a ques-11 on for the jury. … Its invalidity must be made to appear clearly, plainly, fully, unequivocally, convincingly and by highly persuasive, irrefragable evidence.

Clearview Education Ass'n, OEA/NEA v. Clearview Local School District Board of Education

141 Ohio App. 3d 366 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 7, 2001

The Clearview Local School District Board of Education (“the board”) posted the vacancy and established a screening committee. … It simply means that the most qualified candidate was already a member of the unit.

Peizer v. Bergeon

111 Ohio App. 205 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 18, 1960

The agreement pleaded as consideration for the note was based on a contract which was unilateral in character and was clearly am *50 biguous and uncertain. … The last paragraph was clearly wrong.

Williamson v. Bechtel, Unpublished Decision (10-9-2003)

2003 Ohio 5385 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 2003

Appellants assert the evidence failed to support appellees' complete defense that sovereign immunity precluded appellants' claims. … Indeed, they clearly established the existence of appellees' full defense to appellants' claim of negligence. {¶ 29} In Colbert, the supreme court included within the definition of "emergency call" a pursuit that began after

State ex rel. Arberia, L.L.C. v. Indus. Comm.

2014 Ohio 5351 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2014

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. … Unrebutted medical evidence established the spinal cord injury rendered him a quadriplegic.

State v. Bankston

2025 Ohio 5543 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 2025

“‘Such speculation is insufficient to establish ineffective assistance.’” State v. Snowden, 2019-Ohio-3006, ¶ 101 (2d Dist.), quoting State v. … However, “‘[t]he extent and scope of cross-examination clearly fall within the ambit of trial strategy, and debatable trial tactics do not establish ineffective assistance of counsel.’” (Bracketed text in original.)

State Ex Rel. Dacek v. Cleveland Trinidad Paving Co.

35 Ohio App. 118 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 1929

We think it sufficient to say that he has qualified *125 himself as a taxpayer and is therefore legally entitled to bring this suit. Beyond that this court cannot inquire. … While the proceedings for the establishment of this improvement are governed by the old law, yet in our opinion the contract in question, having been entered into after the taking effect of the budget law, is subject to the

State v. Bates

2024 Ohio 5831 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 2024

Applying the statutory framework established by R.C. 2152.12, the juvenile court sifted through the evidence before ultimately concluding that Mr. … And the severity of the crime, and death of the victim (R.C. 2152.12(D)(1)) clearly weighed on the court.

In re R.R.

2026 Ohio 1919 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 26, 2026

The parties shall submit expert reports and curricula vitae in accordance with the time schedule established by the Court. … Thereafter, the responding party shall submit opposing expert reports within the schedule established by the Court.