Case law

State v. Tillman, Unpublished Decision (11-22-2004)

2004 Ohio 6240 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 2004

Appellant argues that "allowing the `expert' testimony of the State's unlicensed psychological assistant caused unfair prejudice, confused the issues, and clearly mislead the jury regarding the weight that should be assigned … It is further well-established that "any communication between judge and jury that takes place outside the presence of the defendant * * * is error which may warrant the ordering of a new trial." Bostic v.

State ex rel. Matheny v. Indus. Comm.

190 N.E.3d 1209 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 31, 2022

that income wholly unrelated to job performance should not be included in the AWW calculation, McDulin does not appear to hold, as relator appears to contend, that every employment benefit measured by hour worked would qualify … 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.

State v. Roman-Navarre

2025 Ohio 3156 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 4, 2025

Expert Testimony {¶25} The State further presented expert testimony to establish the nature and impact of the abuse. {¶26} First, the trial court qualified Alissa Edgein, a pediatric nurse practitioner, as … Martin, 2022-Ohio-4175, ¶ 26.  {¶137} When reviewing the manifest weight of the evidence, the question is whether the jury clearly lost its way in resolving conflicts, resulting in a manifest miscarriage of justice

Seaford v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

159 Ohio App. 3d 374 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 16, 2004

Rules may be adopted to provide for the temporary assignment of judges to sit and hold court in any court established by law. Section 5(A)(3), Article IV. … Ayers clearly held that FELA admits apportionment between an employer and employee based on comparative fault, but not, however, between employers.

State v. Miller

2023 Ohio 1141 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 2023

The relevant inquiry is “whether the bruising is severe enough to qualify as serious disfigurement.” Jarrell at ¶ 14. … Based on our resolution of the previous assignments of error, Miller cannot establish a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel.

Columbus v. Horton

2014 Ohio 4584 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 2014

This substantial compliance standard excuses errors that are clearly de minimis, errors which the Supreme Court of Ohio has characterized as " 'minor procedural deviations.' " Burnside at ¶ 34, quoting Homan at 426. … {¶ 19} The nature of the city's burden to establish substantial compliance is determined by the degree of specificity with which the defendant challenges the legality of the test.

State ex rel. Daniels v. State Teachers Retirement Sys.

2017 Ohio 7847 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 27, 2017

Daniels asserts the trial court committed “plain error because it held that the cause of action was based on the Order of the Domestic Relations Court, when the Petition clearly stated that it was based on a statute.” … Only those retirants who selected option 3 at the time of retirement can exercise the reversion option upon certain qualifying events. See R.C. 3307.60(A)(3).

Cowans v. Ohio State Racing Comm.

2014 Ohio 1811 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 29, 2014

The rule establishes a zero tolerance policy for the presence of foreign substances in race horses unless the Commission creates an exception or establishes a permissible threshold level of the foreign substance. { … Civ.R. 54(D) clearly places the award of costs within the discretion of the court. See, e.g., Friday v. Rice, 38 Ohio App.3d 113, 114 (10th Dist.1987).

State v. Garrett, Unpublished Decision (11-16-2006)

2006 Ohio 6020 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 16, 2006

First, the State argues that the officer's good faith in executing the arrest warrant qualifies as a valid exception to the exclusionary rule. … Nonetheless, the public record clearly substantiates it.

State ex rel. Byard v. Park

2020 Ohio 3062 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 21, 2020

. {¶17} In reaching this conclusion, the Goldberg court first noted the Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply “ ‘to the extent they would be clearly inapplicable.’ Civ.R.1(C)(7).” Id. at ¶ 12. … This statutory confidentiality is qualified and can be modified with the consent of the court.” Id. at ¶ 13.

Hicks v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

95 N.E.3d 852 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 2017

Crackle qualifies as an insured party under the Policy" and that State Farm was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Doc. # 19, p. 7. {¶ 12} Hicks appeals from the trial court's judgment. II. … Id. at *2. {¶ 58} Bish did not involve a second permittee situation; instead, the owner clearly gave the driver permission to move the car.

Hendricks v. Hendricks, 15-08-08 (12-22-2008)

2008 Ohio 6754 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 2008

As Marvin's objection to the magistrate's finding pertaining to the valuation of his business was clearly considered by the trial court, which reduced Lisa's award to $1,000, Marvin's assignment of error is moot. {¶ 27} Accordingly … the acquisition of a professional degree of the other party; (k) The time and expense necessary for the spouse who is seeking spousal support to acquire education, training, or job experience so that the spouse will be qualified

Baur v. City of Wadsworth, Unpublished Decision (7-31-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 31, 2002

circumstances, we cannot conclude that the trial court acted against the manifest weight of the evidence when it found that the property owners' evidence produced no more than a debatable question and, therefore, failed to establish … Kaiser does not qualify as a person who can give an expert opinion, the property owners point to the fact that Mr.

In re R.G.

2020 Ohio 3032 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 21, 2020

Paternity has not been established. * * * The alleged father(s) has abandoned the child. … But the record reflects that this placement was necessary because R.G. needed to be placed with medically qualified foster parents who were able to care for his extensive medical needs.

State v. Gillum

2022 Ohio 2005 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 2022

Licking County, Case No. 2021 CA 00063 19 {¶51} Clearly, Dr. Logan was qualified as an expert neonatologist. We agree with the trial judge. The fact Dr. … Stepp, 117 Ohio App.3d 561, 568–569, 690 N.E.2d 1342(4th Dist. 1997). {¶80} Aiding and abetting may also be established by overt acts of assistance such as driving a getaway car or serving as a lookout.

Wilson

2014 Ohio 3182 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 21, 2014

Having reviewed the record, we cannot say that this is the exceptional case where the jury clearly lost its way. See Thompkins at 387; Otten at 340. … When viewed in the light most favorable to the State, that testimony is sufficient to establish the refusal element of R.C. 4511.19(A)(2). Thus, Ms.

State v. Mitchell

2019 Ohio 2465 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 2019

R.C. 2937.222(A). {¶ 14} Two of Mitchell’s alleged felonies qualified, as they were first-degree felonies. … Tuscarawas No. 2009 AP 11 0059, 2010-Ohio-2587, ¶ 32 (stating only that “we find the trial court's decision is clearly supported by clear and convincing evidence and the trial court did not err in denying bail”).

State Ex Rel. S. Cent. Ohio Ed. Svc. Ctr., Unpublished Decision (10-1-2003)

2003 Ohio 5273 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 2003

Chapter 3311. clearly indicate the primary authority of the board of elections to determine the sufficiency and validity of petitions. … Relator concludes that the General Assembly could clearly have given respondent the superior authority in R.C. 3311.26 , but did not.

In re Adoption of B.R.R.

2024 Ohio 478 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 2024

.) {¶11} The trial court subsequently denied Father’s application for appointed counsel, finding he earns in excess of the qualifying amount. … The trial court did not clearly lose its way or create a manifest miscarriage of justice.

MCM Home Builders, L.L.C. v. Sheehan

2019 Ohio 3899 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 2019

The question of what may lay a foundation for the admissibility of business records as a custodian or other qualified witness must be answered broadly. Carrington Mtge. Services, LLC v. Shepherd, 5th Dist. … MCM responded that pursuant to the case law regarding a cost-plus contract, MCM must establish it was invoiced and paid those amounts, but it was not its burden to establish the contents of the invoices.