Case law

State v. Reed

2021 Ohio 1623 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 10, 2021

Seneca No. 13-16-06, 2016-Ohio-5554, ¶ 31. {¶17} Notably, notwithstanding the wording of Reed’s assignment of error, the record clearly established the trial court conducted an analysis of these factors both … Thus, Reed’s sentence is not clearly and convincingly contrary to law, and it must therefore be affirmed. See Burks, 2d Dist.

Scott v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.

2013 Ohio 4383 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 3, 2013

The first defense raised by ODRC is an assertion of discretionary immunity. {¶ 24} Under the judicially-created doctrine of discretionary immunity, ODRC is generally immune from tort liability for decisions related … . {¶ 25} This court has clearly rejected instances in which the claimed discretionary immunity applies to mere execution or implementation of policy decisions. See, e.g., Franks v.

Hall v. GMS Mgt. Co.

2021 Ohio 2392 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 14, 2021

, attorney immunity, immunity of parties and witnesses during judicial proceedings, and lack of a cause of action asserted against GMS, therefore, the 9th District, Barberton Court, and Landlord’s motions … The assignments are not clearly stated and, to the extent we can interpret them, they contain no discernible connection to the actions of the trial court in the case below.

Swart v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction

133 Ohio App. 3d 420 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 1999

A plaintiff who establishes the existence of a special duty not only avoids the operation of the public duty rule, but also automatically establishes the duty element of a negligence cause of action. … Although R.C. 2967.131(A) was not specifically addressed in the Hurst opinion, the court’s analysis is clearly applicable to the facts of the case at bar.

State ex rel. Bazetta Twp. v. Yoder

2025 Ohio 4915 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 27, 2025

function and no exceptions to immunity apply. … She contends that the facts pleaded in the Township’s complaint, accepted as true, establish that she was sued in tort for the performance of a governmental function and that no exceptions to political-subdivision immunity

Kraft v. Volunteers of Am. Dayton Residential Reentry Program

2023 Ohio 3912 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 27, 2023

immunity, or the absence of a duty of care. … At a minimum, the appellants claim the trial court should have allowed limited discovery to establish whether Wyatt had been out of Ohio during the relevant time. {¶ 15} In entering judgment on the pleadings in

Boyd v. Village of Lexington, Unpublished Decision (3-14-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 2002

Public officials, including police officers, who perform discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages in a Section 1983 action by qualified immunity if their conduct does not violate "clearly established … Thereafter, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish that the defendant's conduct violated a right so clearly established that any official in the defendant's position would have clearly understood that he was under

Wilson v. Barnesville Hospital

151 Ohio App. 3d 55 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 27, 2002

The court qualified these statements, however, explaining that “R.C. 2305.25 does not provide blanket immunity to a hospital for negligence in granting and/or continuing staff privileges of an incompetent physician.” … Although we agree that the peer review statute protects many of the documents utilized by a peer review committee, there are clearly materials that are discoverable under the statute.

Fondale v. Guernsey Cty. Children's Servs.

2012 Ohio 3621 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 9, 2012

CLEARLY THE DATE OR DATES OF THE ALLEGED ABUSE BY APPELLANT, CHARLES FONDALE. … . {¶30} The court found the actions of appellees in not obtaining attendance records and not clearly establishing the date or dates of the alleged abuse could have been negligent, but did not rise to the level of

Johnson v. Godsey

2013 Ohio 3277 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2013

Johnson claims that it was “clearly known by all parties by March 15, 2011 Pre-Trial Conference” that he had sued Godsey in an individual, not a representative, capacity and thus Godsey’s attorney should not have drafted … immunity.”

Mocznianski v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs.

2020 Ohio 1161 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 27, 2020

that will necessitate an individual’s independent provider to exceed the limit established in paragraph (D)(1) of this rule. … Specifically, there is nothing clearly and unequivocally indicating that the word “may” in section (D)(3)(a)(iii) should not receive its ordinary construction.

State v. Hutchings

2014 Ohio 4675 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 23, 2014

The CCUA establishes (again, at most) rights between qualified California residents and the state of California — not the state of Oregon. … The MMMA, a public act, establishes rights between qualified Michigan residents and the state of Michigan; however, it does not interfere with or circumvent the state of Ohio’s application of its own criminal statutes.

McCormick v. Mirrored Image, Inc.

7 Ohio App. 3d 232 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 1, 1982

Dietz were partners or shareholders in several restaurant and nightclub establishments. … Thus, where the supplier of the hearsay information fails to qualify under the rule, and no other exception exists for its introduction, the evidence is inadmissible, despite the fact that the recorder may be qualified.

Garrison v. Bobbitt

134 Ohio App. 3d 373 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 18, 1999

“‘The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities. … may be asserted to establish nonliability: a * * * *384 “(6) In addition to any immunity or defense referred to in division (A)(7) of this section and in circumstances not covered by that division or sections 8314.07 and

Dollar Savings & Trust Co. v. City of Youngstown

19 Ohio App. 2d 225 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 1969

Judge Hart defined a qualified nuisance in paragraph three of the syllabus as follows: “As distinguished from absolute nuisance, a qualified nuisance or nuisance dependent upon negligence consists of anything lawfully but … We think it inherent in a logical construction of the statute that a duty devolves upon the local authority to eliminate crosswalks by acts clearly inferred in the statute.

State v. Flynn

2024 Ohio 941 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 2024

And furthermore, the court found the evidence clearly showed that the Garrity materials were in the possession of the Law Director’s Office for months prior to the charges being filed. … Thus, the court found that the State failed to affirmatively establish that the Garrity materials were not used in the criminal investigation nor in the Law Director’s decision to file charges.

State v. Harwood

26 Ohio Law. Abs. 473 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 1937

In this case the delinquency lays in the failure to enforce the prohibition law when immunity is bought and paid for. … The evidence clearly established that Captain Harwood, along with Captain Van Norman were in command of the 14th and 15th precincts during that portion of the years of 1928 and 1929 covered by the indictment; that five prosecuting

Krieger v. Cleveland Indians Baseball Co.

176 Ohio App. 3d 410 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 8, 2008

of the immunity defense, because it asserted statutory immunity in its first answer to appellees’ amended complaint. … Clearly, by the time the case proceeded to trial, the city was on notice that there *434 was a potential for liability in this case.

Mankins v. Paxton

142 Ohio App. 3d 1 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 2001

Appellant’s third claim avers that she was deprived of rights, privileges, and/or immunities granted by federal law in violation of Section 1983. … conform and further establishes a procedure whereby exercise of the discretion can be reviewed effectively.

Sampson v. Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority

188 Ohio App. 3d 250 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 22, 2010

His claims clearly arose out of his employment relationship — he was given a gasoline credit card to put gas in his employer’s vehicles. … must be established.