Case law

Total Office Prods. v. Dept. of Adm. Servs., 2007-T-0035 (9-28-2007)

2007 Ohio 5211 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2007

Finally, the notice states that Total Office Products "has not established control of the funds deposited in the `Lockbox.'" … These were clearly identified in the notice as the day-to-day control of Total Office Products' operations.

State v. Burrell, Unpublished Decision (5-25-2006)

2006 Ohio 2593 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 25, 2006

The report must contain an attestation that the laboratory tests were conducted with due caution and in accordance with established and accepted procedures. Id. … A review of the record, however, does not establish this fact. The lab report does not prescribe the date the substance was tested.

State v. Carnes, 2006-T-0055 (5-4-2007)

2007 Ohio 2166 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 4, 2007

The reviewing court must consider all the evidence in the record, the reasonable inferences, the credibility of the witnesses, and whether, "in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the [trier of fact] clearly lost its way … Bognaird offered no opinion as to whether Matusky qualified as a sexual predator. {¶ 23} In order to properly classify Matusky as sexual predator, the court must find that Matusky "is likely to engage in the future in one

State v. Jackson

2025 Ohio 109 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 16, 2025

The State, however, must prove the elements of the qualifying predicate offense — including any mens rea element specific to that criminal act. Id. … Finally, it has long been held that “[m]otive is not an element of the crime of murder and need not be established to warrant a conviction; proof of motive does not establish guilt, nor does want of proof thereof establish

State v. Pampley

2024 Ohio 251 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 25, 2024

It was clearly placed on the record that Mr. Pampley would be serving a prison sentence. And so that was explained to him clearly. … It is well established, however, that “[a] defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea prior to sentencing.

State v. Roby

2010 Ohio 1498 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 5, 2010

An alleged error constitutes plain error only if the error is obvious and, but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been different. State v. … Our review of the record finds that there was sufficient evidence to support Roby’s conviction for burglary as a matter of law. {¶25} The testimony at trial clearly established that the semi-truck was an “occupied

Price v. Daugherty

5 Ohio App. 3d 157 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 1982

It is prejudicial error to admit a record into evidence when the record contains an opinion of a person who has not been properly qualified as an expert and which was made through practices and procedures which are of such … Clearly, there was no direct testimony, consistent with the requirements of Ackerman, supra, that Price had a psychiatric disorder on October 11, 1973.

State v. Oatneal

2025 Ohio 2357 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 3, 2025

The circumstances in which an encounter occurs – e.g., at or near the scene of the crime versus at a police station, during an ongoing emergency or afterwards – are clearly matters of objective fact … Thus, in addition to her statements having been admitted in violation of the Confrontation Clause, K.F.’s statements did not qualify as excited utterances.

Hoke v. Miami Valley Hosp.

2020 Ohio 3387 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 2020

The Hokes have failed to establish the existence of repetitive “friendly” crosses. … Miller’s allegedly inadequate training on the robotic system, we note that the Hokes’ own expert testified that she was qualified. In particular, Dr. McCarus, testified: “I have no doubt that [Dr.

State v. Emonds

26 Ohio Law. Abs. 410 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1938

The evidence seems to establish that the victim, Beebe and his three companions had been aggressor's in annoying and worrying the defendant. … Clearly this defendant must be distinguished from one who without provocation and of his own spontaneous conduct engages in a crime of violence.

Nauman v. Cooper Energy Svcs. Intl., Unpublished Decision (4-15-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 2002

Ellis's affidavit, curriculum vital and report establishes that it is an opinion that qualifies under Evid.R. 702 cited supra . Clearly, matters of safety standards fall outside the general knowledge of laymen. Dr. … To establish an intentional tort of an employer, proof beyond that required to prove negligence and beyond that to prove recklessness must be established.

Hannibal Dev., L.L.C. v. Monroe Water Sys.

2021 Ohio 2338 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2021

The third count requests declaratory judgment to establish that Hannibal did not owe the amount paid. … However, we note that the specific issue in both Buckeye and Mauldin involves an immunity analysis, thus these cases are not directly on point. See Buckeye, supra; Mauldin v. Youngstown Water, Dept., 7th Dist.

Bethel Oil & Gas, L.L.C. v. Redbird Dev., L.L.C.

258 N.E.3d 470 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 23, 2024

See generally Maternal Grandmother, 2021-Ohio- 4096, at ¶ 11 (“when a complaint invokes the exception to a government employee’s immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b), notice pleading suffices and the plaintiff may not … WASHINGTON, 23CA5 65 {¶93} In their complaint, appellants have alleged a “qualified nuisance.”

Bruno v. State

15 Ohio Law. Abs. 693 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 5, 1934

The Supreme Court of this state, in the opinion in State v Hoffman, 86 Oh St, 235, says: “The object of the examinations of persons called to act as jurors is to determixxe whether or not they are qualified to sit in the … It clearly appears from all the evidence that the criminal transaction occurred in the State of Ohio.” It appears from the record that John A.

Peddler's Junction, L.L.C. v. Washington Square, L.L.C.

2025 Ohio 3054 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2025

A clear and unambiguous promise is one that is “definite in the sense of being clearly a promise and not just a statement of intentions.” Garwood Packaging, Inc. v. … Id. at 30. {¶38} The trial court concluded that the State was immune from liability and dismissed the complaint.

Thomason v. AT&T

2018 Ohio 4914 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 10, 2018

malicious prosecution and abuse of process against AT&T and the Belmont County defendants were remanded after summary judgment was entered in favor of the Belmont County defendants on the excessive force claims on the basis of qualified … immunity. {¶26} On remand, Appellant voluntarily dismissed the state claims against the Belmont County defendants.

In re G.M.

2022 Ohio 3687 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 17, 2022

after Mother and the children resumed living with Father, the Agency filed a complaint alleging that the three children, G.M., M.M., and J.M., were dependent based upon the above facts and that G.M. was behind on her immunizations … In analyzing the best interest factors, the magistrate found that, although Mother clearly loves her children, the children consider the foster parents to be their parents.

Herman v. Industrial Comm.

37 Ohio Law. Abs. 285 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1941

On a *286 rehearing the Commission adhered to its ruling on the ground “that proof fails to establish the claimant’s disability as a result of the injury herein.” … A reading of this record shows that the plaintiff is not an educated person and was hardly qualified to fill out the application himself, although there is nothing in the record to indicate that the plaintiff was not a straightforward

State, Ex Rel. Lemperle v. McIntosh

75 Ohio App. 164 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 3, 1944

forth in §§4616, et seq., GC. ' Since its establishment by the City of Cincinnati it has had a continuous existence. … This is clearly pointed out in the case of Mell, et al. v State, ex rel.

In re V.J.P.

2021 Ohio 1779 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 24, 2021

To apply this standard, the appellate 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 … However, he has established a bond with his caregivers, with whom he has resided since his release from the hospital.