Case law

Charrier v. State

30 Ohio C.C. Dec. 578 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 1918

"When properly challenged here, it can have acquired by reason of the parties returning to this state to live, no more immunity from attack than it would have had if they, from the time of the ceremony and thereafter, had … Probably they were competent as tending to show “state of mind,” which seems to be the drag-net to sweep in much matter that otherwise would clearly be inadmissible.

Wells v. Miami Valley Hospital

90 Ohio App. 3d 840 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 1993

Knapp, failed to qualify himself as an expert on the relevant obstetrical standard of care, particularly because Dr. … Appellees sufficiently established at trial (1) that Dr.

Doe v. Blue cross/blue Shield of Ohio

79 Ohio App. 3d 369 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 21, 1992

At the first meeting, Shwed allegedly requested that the Does deliver a copy of the policy to her so that Harding’s patient accounts manager, Anna Pfeiffer, could determine whether Jane’s insurance benefits qualified her … Appellant’s “assumption of duty” theory to establish negligence liability in this case is misplaced.

State v. Carstaphen

2022 Ohio 3129 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 2022

Further, proof of motive does not establish guilt. … The trial court did not err in imposing an indefinite prison sentence for appellant’s qualifying offenses. III.

Burger v. Cleveland, Unpublished Decision (3-29-2007)

2007 Ohio 1456 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2007

The facts establish that Burger's injuries were sustained on the sidewalk, not the bridge. Burger's reliance on Trader v. City of Cleveland , Cuyahoga App. No. 86227, 2006-Ohio-295 is misplaced. … In Trader , this Court held that the City was not immune from suit as a *Page 8 matter of law where a traffic pole fell and injured a motorist traveling on a public road.

Hunter v. Green

2012 Ohio 5801 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 2012

reviewing court is to examine the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses, and determine “whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the finder of fact clearly … Rather, a signed acknowledgment of an oral promise can qualify as a memorandum that satisfies the statute, even if the acknowledgment repudiates the oral promise.

Mancz v. McHenry

2021 Ohio 82 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 15, 2021

established prior to the McHenrys’ counsel’s own questioning. … The plain language of R.C. 1336.04 clearly provides that the claim of the creditor can arise after the transfer of the property.”

State v. Andrews

2026 Ohio 1861 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 21, 2026

“To qualify for this exception, the state must show by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) the defendant’s wrongdoing resulted in the witness’s unavailability; and (2) ‘one purpose was to cause the witness to be unavailable … has long held that, for purposes of Evid.R. 804, “the evidence of unavailability ‘must be based on the personal knowledge of witnesses rather than upon hearsay not under oath, at least when unavailability has not been clearly

Job v. Cleveland Dance Center

62 Ohio App. 3d 678 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 1, 1989

Qualifying “employment” is likewise not defined in the Revised Code. … Clearly, the jury was not given an answer to its question.

In re T.S.

2020 Ohio 2972 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 15, 2020

“Clear and convincing evidence” is evidence sufficient for the trier of fact to form a firm conviction or belief that the essential statutory elements for a termination of parental rights have been established. … Housing Authority, but father did not qualify because of his eviction history; (3) discuss housing through Madonna Homes, but father did not qualify because of his criminal history; (4) suggest that father rent an unsubsidized

State v. Hirsch

129 Ohio App. 3d 294 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 7, 1998

These arguments clearly comported with the state’s strategy of painting Hirsch as the sort of violent individual who would commit aggravated murder. … The proponent of evidence allegedly falling under this exception must lay a proper foundation for its admission through the testimony of the records custodian or some other qualified individual.

State v. Glasure

132 Ohio App. 3d 227 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 2, 1999

However, due to the fact that appellant failed to provide the court with the affidavit of indigency and the financial statement to determine whether he qualified for the service of the Public Defender, the court had to discharge … The complaint does not clearly state who the creditor is. I have absolutely no idea of what I’m goin’ up agin [sic].” After the trial, the jury returned a guilty verdict on the charged offense.

State v. Keith

2017 Ohio 5488 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 26, 2017

As will be discussed infra Keith cannot establish that there was a strong possibility the evidence would change the result of his trial, and he would have difficulty establishing multiple other provisions under Petro as well … Thus none of the cases cited by Keith, including his own 2009 attempt, establish that the trial court abused its discretion by determining that Keith did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that he was unavoidably

Greater Dayton Regional Transit Auth. v. Amalgamated Transit Union AFL-CIO Local 1385

2019 Ohio 392 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 2019

This past practice was unequivocal, was clearly enunciated, and was followed for a reasonable period of time as a fixed and established practice accepted by both parties. It, therefore, was binding on the parties. … Under the test that the Supreme Court of Ohio adopted, this practice was unequivocal, was clearly enunciated, and was followed for a reasonable period of time as a fixed and established practice accepted by RTA and the

State v. Park

2012 Ohio 4069 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 4, 2012

Blosser's testimony and the inter-office memorandum, believes that he qualifies as a 'policy-making administrative officer' and that the criteria for changing the frequency of vehicles stopped–the changing traffic flow–is … weight, a reviewing court is to examine the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses and determine "whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly

State v. Cartwright

2024 Ohio 5638 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 2, 2024

Standard of Review {¶8} Manifest “weight of the evidence and sufficiency of the evidence are clearly different legal concepts.” State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 389 (1997). … The Supreme Court of Ohio has set forth the following test for determining whether a statement qualifies as an excited utterance under Evid.R. 803(2): (a) that there was some occurrence startling enough to produce

Grundy v. Dhillon, 2006-T-0007 (6-1-2007)

2007 Ohio 2693 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 2007

{¶ 65} I must respectfully dissent inasmuch as there is insufficient evidence to establish juror misconduct and insufficient evidence to establish that the plaintiff was denied a right to an impartial jury. … (Emphasis added.) {¶ 67} In the instant case, there is no evidence in the record to establish that Juror Krusely gave a dishonest answer.

Smith v. Burroughs

2010 Ohio 4806 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 4, 2010

Collie (1996), 108 Ohio App.3d 580, 583, and we find the record clearly demonstrates that sufficient evidence existed to establish that Richard’s threat of death was imminent and Alysha believed it could occur at any moment … Although some evidence indicated that the children did reside at least part time in the residence with Alysha and Richard, suggesting that the children may have qualified under the definition of family or household member

Warner v. Palmer

2017 Ohio 1080 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 22, 2017

We cannot answer a specific legal question, on whether title passed by will for instance, when the facts defining the scope of the legal issue have not been fully established. … Some do not qualify as written instruments under Civ.R. 10(C). This stage of the case is not conducive to these types of documentary evidence.

State v. Roberts, Unpublished Decision (7-25-2003)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2003

First, he contends the trial court erred in qualifying a handwriting examiner as an expert without giving defense counsel an opportunity for cross examination. … We note, however, that defense counsel never sought to cross examine Bowling, electing instead to raise a general objection as to the qualifications established by the prosecutor.