Case law

Alropa Corp. v. Kirchwehm

33 Ohio Law. Abs. 39 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 1, 1940

However, when such evidence, in whatever form, is introduced, it becomes the duty of the court to construe and deduce the principle established. … R., the courts considered the question as to whether or not the instruments were under seal according to the law of the forum, and determining that they did not so qualify under the law of the forum, they were only simple

Quester v. Quester

2024 Ohio 1456 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2024

Clearly, if one spouse has substantial earning ability and the other does not, then this disparity will be a factor to be considered along with the other statutory factors when arriving at reasonable spousal … The parties’ separation agreement allowed Wife to present testimony from a vocational expert that would establish Husband’s relative earning ability in addition to any testimony of his actual income.

Keybank Natl. Assn. v. Firestone

2019 Ohio 2910 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2019

On appeal, Cindy argues she qualifies as a beneficiary under the Trust by operation of R.C. 3107.15(A)(2). … Reynolds concerned the interpretation of certain language contained in a trust established by the last will and testament of the decedent in 1959.

Columbus v. Galli

2013 Ohio 5325 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 2013

(R. 15, at 5.) {¶ 16} As to the initial violations, although Galli clearly disagreed with the Board's decision upholding the 2007 Order, he also acknowledged that his failure to appeal the Board's holding left him … the gravel qualified as a permissible nonconforming use.

State v. Fields

2017 Ohio 400 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 2017

-5- With that said, the Court is faced with City’s Exhibit 1, the IRS Form 1099-Misc which clearly lists Defendant … Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688. {¶ 38} To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate both that trial counsel’s conduct fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that the

State v. Ford

2018 Ohio 2128 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 31, 2018

A trial court’s findings of no discriminatory intent will not be reversed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. State v. Hernandez (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 577, 583, 589 N.E.2d 1310, following Hernandez v. … Taylor, 66 Ohio St.3d 295, 300, 612 N.E.2d 316 (1993). {¶31} To qualify as an “excited utterance” the following four factors must be established: (a) that there was some occurrence startling enough to produce

L.F. v. Simpson

2026 Ohio 1019 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2026

credible evidence sustains the issue which is to be established before them. … An inability to sleep or concentrate on work can qualify as a temporary substantial incapacity and can also constitute a condition that would normally require mental health services. R.G. v.

State v. Dewitt, 21620 (6-29-2007)

2007 Ohio 3437 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 2007

Contrastingly, the decision as to which of several competing inferences, suggested by the evidence in the record, should be preferred, is a matter in which an appellate judge is at least equally qualified, by reason and experience … At trial, both witnesses testified that they had the opportunity to clearly observe the defendant during the robbery.

Qaqa v. Cintron

2024 Ohio 2970 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 2024

. {¶ 7} Father moved the Warren County domestic relations court to establish a shared parenting schedule while the divorce was pending. … We do not find that Williams establishes that the domestic relations court abused its discretion in arriving at its decision in this case. III.

State v. Jackson

208 N.E.3d 1010 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 2023

To prevail under a plain-error analysis, the appellant bears the burden of demonstrating that, but for the error, the outcome of the trial would clearly have been different. State v. … As you were saying it to me and you qualified it as a sexual encounter for the person that started it, that to me is irrelevant. I don’t know when the no is said in the course of what is going on.

In re B.N.

2026 Ohio 419 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2026

As such, plain error is particularly difficult to establish in these matters. … wishes was negated by the facts of the case, namely the child had been in custody No. 23AP-681 21 since he was four days old and no longer qualified

Irvine v. Akron Beacon Journal

147 Ohio App. 3d 428 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 8, 2002

“The [reviewing] 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 lost its way … Beacon Journal contends that the evidence established that Beacon Journal did not know that it was violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by running its autodialer all night.

Country Pure Springwater, Inc. v. McClain

2019 Ohio 3989 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 30, 2019

Further, CPS does not dispute that it no longer possesses the documentation and evidence to establish that the taxes were paid. … However, “[a]ll or part of any penalty imposed under this section may be abated by the commissioner if the taxpayer, qualifying entity, or employer shows that the failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter is

Porach v. Cleveland Clinic Found.

2025 Ohio 2522 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2025

Gluck, who has practiced medicine for 50 years, testified that although he is not a physical medicine and rehabilitation physician, he is qualified to give his expertise on the administration of morphine. … Gluck, clearly and unequivocally testified that the only standard-of-care violation that proximately caused Andrew’s death was the administration of morphine. Specifically, Dr.

Whitman v. Gerson

2016 Ohio 311 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 29, 2016

He clearly made efforts to protect the underlying property, and took action to further protect his interests upon learning of the tax certificate sale. {¶18} The Whitmans next argue that the value of the property … The court noted that the auditor’s valuation was not contested, and with the encumbrances on the property in question exceeding the valuation, the property did not qualify as an “asset” under R.C. 1336.01(B).

Pennex Aluminum Co., L.L.C. v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs.

2014 Ohio 5308 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 28, 2014

. {¶ 8} After review, the trial court found the undisputed evidence established that Pennex did not acquire the aluminum extrusion plant in Youngstown, Ohio, nor did Pennex acquire the accounts receivable, existing … In successor-in-interest cases, "this court has defined 'abuse of discretion' as connoting more than an error in judgment, but implying a decision that is without a reasonable basis and clearly wrong."

State v. Mapp

2024 Ohio 5493 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 2024

and further tolled Mapp’s speedy-trial time under R.C. 2945.72(H). {¶ 24} The state argues that the court should conclude that the 106-day continuance granted to protect Barton from COVID exposure would likewise qualify … But he does not challenge either the video evidence or the testimony of Bowser, both of which clearly place him on the patio at the precise time the shootings occurred.

Drouhard v. Drouhard

2017 Ohio 7305 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2017

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 … Lastly, the magistrate found that both parties clearly “believed that the marriage ended prior to the final hearing.”

State v. Moore, 06-Ma-15 (3-12-2008)

2008 Ohio 1190 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 2008

Also, the evidence used to establish Counts nine and ten was sufficiently separate and distinct. … "A reviewing court should be slow to interfere unless the court has clearly abused its discretion and a party has been materially prejudiced thereby." Id.

State v. Lundy

41 Ohio App. 3d 163 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 3, 1987

Although we accept the appellants’ characterization of the scope of the Sixth Amendment guarantee of compulsory process, we note that this right is qualified and find that the appellants have mistaken the import of the court … Ford testified that Lundy and Foster planned the robbery, that Lundy drove them to and from the establishment, and that Lundy received a percentage of the spoils.