Case law

Kyser v. Board of Elections

33 Ohio App. 2d 52 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 1972

C. 3503.01 which was amended effective March 23, 1972 clearly sets forth the requirements for qualifying to vote at an election. … CL 3503.02 establishes the rules for determining residence. 1 One of the requirements for qualifying as an elector is that of residence as defined in E. C. 3503.02.

Picciuto v. Lucas County Commissioners

69 Ohio App. 3d 789 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 12, 1990

immunity. … statute; (3) the Picciutos' federal claim was barred by or subject to the federal doctrine of sovereign immunity; and, (4) that the defendants were protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

State v. Lewis

2015 Ohio 4303 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 14, 2015

I took no immunity for this. I mean I’m here. Q [Defense Counsel]. But-- I understand that. But you did ask for help on the jail sentence and for immunity if you told them some stuff, correct? … Considering this and weighing the evidence, we cannot find that the jury, when resolving the conflicts in evidence, clearly lost its way and created a manifest miscarriage of justice.

Tanksley v. Howell

2020 Ohio 4278 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 1, 2020

Tanksley asserted defendants were not entitled to immunity on his race discrimination claim, as their discriminatory conduct satisfied the exception to political-subdivision employee immunity in either R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)( … In order to establish a prima facie case, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she: (1) is a member of a protected class, (2) suffered an adverse employment action, (3) was qualified for the position in question, and (

Norwell v. City of Cincinnati

133 Ohio App. 3d 790 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 28, 1999

Additionally, there are important analytic differences between official- and personal-capacity suits regarding both the degree of proof and the availability of immunity defenses {e.g., qualified immunity). … Obviously, if there was probable cause to make these arrests, the defense of privilege was established.

Reister v. Gardner

2019 Ohio 4720 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 18, 2019

This was clearly not the intent behind the litigation privilege rule. … Therefore, because I believe the majority has now expanded the privilege beyond its originally intended scope that established an absolute privilege only as to defamatory statements in litigation to now provide immunity

Valero v. Futrell

2025 Ohio 2843 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 12, 2025

Hodge testified that Valero used the knife on 1 The knife is not clearly visible in the video recordings. … Therefore, a finding of immunity bars all of Valero’s claims. {¶ 28} For an individual employee of a political subdivision, R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) applies, providing defenses and immunities to establish nonliability

Fuehrer v. Board of Education

4 Ohio App. Unrep. 376 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 1990

HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY ' KNOWN HAZARDS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY HAS THE BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING THE FACTS WHICH GIVE RISE TO SUCH IMMUNITY, [sic] UNDER THE STATUTE SECTION 1533.18 REVISED CODE. … Such "misuse" does not qualify as "*** other recreational pursuits ***" for purposes of the statute Scott Fuehrer was not a recreational user and appellee cannot be exempted from liability based upon R.C. 1533.181.

State v. Lane

108 Ohio App. 3d 477 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 1995

The state qualified Forman as an expert in population genetics, but not molecular biology. … Davis’s testimony that Lane admitted to raping Sargent served to further establish Lane’s identity as the rapist.

Fowler v. Williams County Commissioners

113 Ohio App. 3d 760 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 1996

Finally, appellant contended that no question of fact existed on whether the trench in the roadway or the parking of the backhoe across the road was a “nuisance” within the meaning of R.C. 2744.02(B)(3), thereby qualifying … Finally, R.C. 2744.03 provides additional defenses and immunities which the political subdivision may assert to establish nonliability.

Kniskern v. Township of Somerford

112 Ohio App. 3d 189 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1996

The trial court erred prejudicially, in finding the driver the sole proximate cause of the accident, and that ODOT had immunity, when plaintiffs’ expert’s] uncontradicted affidavits and deposition evidence established — that … The language of the Trumbull County Probate Court order is clearly broad enough to encompass plaintiffs’ claims against Nino Cavaliere’s auto insurance policy with Western Reserve.

State v. Foster

2021 Ohio 1454 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 2021

Incidentally, the - 14 - Case No. 14-20-26 record in this case clearly establishes that Foster committed his offenses after the effective date. {¶24} This definition of … Moreover, the record clearly establishes the trial court analyzed the purposes and principles of felony sentencing and the sentencing factors set forth in R.C. 2929.11 - 17 - Case

Lutz v. Hocking Technical College, Unpublished Decision (5-18-1999)

Ohio Court of Appeals · May 18, 1999

It is well-settled that government officials or employees performing discretionary functions, including police officers, are entitled to qualified immunity "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional … The failure to plead or produce any facts to establish a policy or custom of deliberate indifference has no relation to the law of qualified immunity.

Gaines v. Mqsw Acquisition Co., 2007-L-200 (7-25-2008)

2008 Ohio 3744 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2008

In addition, appellees asserted, as an affirmative defense, that Ohio's Workers' Compensation Act provided immunity from Gaines' claims. {¶ 6} Appellees filed a motion for summary judgment. … However, the creation and installation of these guards clearly qualify as "subsequent remedial measures," evidence of which is not admissible to demonstrate culpable conduct. Hawk v.

Doe v. Adkins

110 Ohio App. 3d 427 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 1996

To establish a claim under the Rehabilitation Act, appellant must prove that she is a handicapped person as defined by the statute, she is otherwise qualified for participation in the program, she is being excluded from participation … Appellant has not shown a clearly manifested intention on behalf of the contracting parties to give appellant a private right to enforce the contract.

Arnott v. Arnott

190 Ohio App. 3d 493 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 1, 2010

Looking at the document as a whole, we conclude that the settlor intended the option price to be the value established for federal and/or state estate-tax purposes, in this case, the federal and/or Ohio qualified-use value … Clearly, the word connotes a degree of physical attachment.

Anderson v. WBNS-TV, Inc.

2024 Ohio 4880 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 2024

Qualified Privilege {¶ 32} If a claimant establishes a prima facie case of defamation, the defendant may invoke as a defense from liability a conditional or qualified privilege. Jackson v. … The trial court determined that the city and Detective Milner were entitled to political-subdivision immunity and, as relevant here, a qualified privilege shielded Crime Stoppers from liability, because Miller “set forth

Dodson v. Bullinger

2010 Ohio 6263 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 2010

Somer filed an immunization exemption with the school stating that she was a pagan as the basis for the exemption. … However, according to the testimony from school personnel, Chandler clearly struggled with impulse control and acting out when around the other students.

Goodyear Service Store v. Speck

48 Ohio App. 2d 115 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 21, 1976

Moreover this statute clearly establishes procedures to be followed when it appears that aid is not inuring to the benefit of the child, including counseling of the mother or even making a child a.ward of the state in extreme … The procedures thus established would better insure that the aid benefits the child than would the court’s decision today.

Esposito v. Stambaugh Auditorium Ass'n

49 Ohio Law. Abs. 507 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 1946

Stambaugh Auditorium Association, Inc., is a non-profit corporation “formed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining an auditorium for exhibitions, conventions, public gatherings and recreational, charitable and educational … Now plaintiff contends, and we agree, that “the immunity of eleemosynary institutions for liability for tort is not absolute under Ohio law but limited or qualified.