Case law

State Ex Rel. Kendrick v. Masheter

120 Ohio App. 168 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 1963

This court considered the problem presented by these conflicts in its decision in the case of Graul v. … Accordingly, under the provisions of Section 143.011, *172 Revised Code, and Chapter 119, Revised Code, we hold the board’s order to be appealable. * * V’ Under Section 143.012, Revised Code, relator’s appeal to the board

Nesbitt, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance

38 Ohio Law. Abs. 299 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 1942

There- is ah .excellent statement on .the question involved in .this case, by the supreme court speaking through Chief Justice .Marshall in Southern Surety Company v Schmitt, 117 Oh St 28The court, referring to §2365-3 GC … Chief Justice Hughes of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Illinois Surety Company v United States, 240 U. S. 214 .

State v. Bradley

2016 Ohio 3245 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 2016

R.C. 2725.03; Brown v. Hall, 123 Ohio St.3d 381, 2009-Ohio-5592, 916 N.E.2d 807, ¶ 1. … .; see also Brown, supra; Goudlock v. Voorhies, 119 Ohio St.3d 398, 2008-Ohio-4787, 894 N.E.2d 692, ¶ 17; Sevayega v. Bobby, 7th Dist. Mahoning No. 03MA48, 2003-Ohio-6395, ¶ 4; Rockwell v. Geauga Cty.

State v. Owens, 07 Ma 153 (6-26-2008)

2008 Ohio 3246 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 26, 2008

Brown and robbed him. Mr. Brown struggled and tried to escape, at which time he was struck. He was carried to an abandoned apartment and was left alone with Appellant. … State v.

State v. Walker

2011 Ohio 5779 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2011

Walker primarily relies upon Brown v. Texas (1979), 443 U.S. 47; however, Brown is distinguishable from the instant matter. … Walker, unlike the appellant in Brown, was seen in the back of a private residence as opposed to a public alley. {¶18} Accordingly, we conclude that Brown is distinguishable and that the officer in the instant matter

Mdj Properties v. Union Township Board, Unpublished Decision (3-27-2000)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 27, 2000

OPINION In a zoning dispute, defendant-appellant/cross-appellee, Union Township Board of Trustees ("Union Township"), appeals the decision of the Clermont County Court of Common Pleas that certain property ("the property" … Leslie v.

Metro Renovations 12, L.L.C. v. Sabir

215 N.E.3d 1242 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 2023

Eastley v. … Hubbard v. Norton, (1875) 28 Ohio St. 116, para. 4 of the syllabus. Adams v. Walton, 5th Dist. Morrow No. 601, 1983 WL 5069, *3; Accord Brown v.

Kipp v. Lorain Board of Education, Unpublished Decision (4-4-2001)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2001

Smith v. Granville Twp. Bd. of Trustees (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 608 , 613 , quoting Kisil v. Sandusky (1984), 12 Ohio St.3d 30 , 34 . In making this determination, we apply an abuse of discretion standard. Nauth v. … Goss v. Lopez (1975), 419 U.S. 565 , 577-84 , 42 L.Ed.2d 725 , 737-40 .

Dressler Coal Corp. v. Call

4 Ohio App. 3d 81 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 17, 1981

See Blue Cross v. Ratchford (1980), 64 Ohio St. 2d 256 [18 O.O. 3d 450]. … In Hospital Care Corp. - Canton Region v.

Martin v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction

140 Ohio App. 3d 831 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 4, 2001

In Brown v. … Brown, supra.

Northridge Local Schools Bd. of Edn. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision

2022 Ohio 495 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 18, 2022

Smith, Inc. v. Harrison Cty. … Assocs., L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga Cty.

Richardson v. Girl Scouts of N.E. Ohio

2014 Ohio 1036 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 2014

[Cite as Richardson v. Girl Scouts of N.E. Ohio, 2014-Ohio-1036.] … Zanesville v.

Hull v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

37 Ohio App. 3d 94 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 1987

For example, in Strohofer v. … The O’Brien v. Egelhoff (1984), 9 Ohio St. 3d 209 , 9 OBR 520, 459 N.E. 2d 886 , and Mathis v.

Dove v. Ohio State Dental Board, Unpublished Decision (3-10-2000)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2000

Pons v. Ohio State Medical Board (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 619 , 621 , rehearing denied (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 1439 ; Am. Legion Post 0046 v. Liquor Control (1996), 111 Ohio App.3d 795 , 799 . … Blakemore v. Blakemore (1983), 5 Ohio St.3d 217 , 219 , quoting State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 , 157 .

Ewers v. Cook

8 Ohio Law. Abs. 608 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 1929

Prior to that time, under the above Section, it was held in the case of State v. … Beamer, et al., 109 Oh St, at page 133, and Sommers v. Board of Education. 112 Oh St, 177, these sections of the 'General Code were held to be mandatory, also in Board of Education v. Cox, 117 Oh St 406.

State v. Rodriguez-Baron

2012 Ohio 1473 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 26, 2012

[Cite as State v. Rodriguez-Baron, 2012-Ohio-1473.] … Gaskins v. Shiplevy, 76 Ohio St.3d 380, 382, 667 N.E.2d 1194 (1996). As such, the judgment entry, not the open court pronouncement of sentence, is the effective instrument for sentencing a defendant. State v.

State Ex Rel. Barbuto v. Ohio Edison Co.

16 Ohio App. 2d 55 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 7, 1968

Atty., v. Ohio Power Co., 163 Ohio St. 451 . It is held, in State, ex rel. Ohio Power Co., v. … Atty., v.

Philbin v. City of Cleveland

101 N.E.3d 1180 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2017

[Cite as Philbin v. Cleveland, 2017-Ohio-9162.] … Moore v. Middletown, 133 Ohio St.3d 55, 2012-Ohio-3897, 975 N.E.2d 977, ¶ 20, citing Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v.

Siegel v. St. Vincent Charity Hospital & Health Center

35 Ohio App. 3d 143 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 1987

As stated in Williamson Heater Co. v. … Center v.

Sherman v. Board of Tax Appeals, Unpublished Decision (3-9-2000)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 9, 2000

This court is not a "`super' board of tax appeals." Hercules Galion Products, Inc. v. Bowers (1960), 171 Ohio St. 176 , 12 O.O.2d 292 , 168 N.E.2d 404 , 405 . As we stated in Wolf v. Cuyahoga Cty. … The Board of Tax Appeals found: In WJJK Investments, Inc. v. Licking Cty.