Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersohioctapp

10,000+ results

4.59s

  • Board of Clark Cty. Commrs. v. Newberry, Unpublished Decision (11-8-2002)

    Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 2002

    . {¶ 3} The present appeal stems from a decision by appellee Clark County Board of Commissioners to widen Leffel Lane in Springfield, Ohio. … See, e.g., Brewer v. Hankins (Aug. 17, 1998), Madison App. No. CA98-01-003; Williams v. Boltenhouse (May 29, 1992), Pickaway App. No. 92 CA 01; Dafco, Inc. v.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • State ex rel. Mittendorf v. Hensing

    10 Ohio App. 205 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 1918

    January 7, 1918, the board was reorganized, three persons elected at the previous November election becoming new members of the board. … Fry v. Booth, 19 Ohio St., 25 , is to the same effect. In the case of Neal v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Hart v. Sala

    10 Ohio App. 52 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 15, 1918

    v. … In Schurtz, Admr., v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Dept. of Youth Servs. v. Mahaffey

    2014 Ohio 4172 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 23, 2014

    Emmons v. Guckenberger, 131 Ohio St. 466, 469 (1936). See also Olander v. … Indeed, appellant was invited by the board to submit to it additional evidence that the board should consider.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • State, Ex Rel. Cox v. Lopeman

    13 Ohio App. 3d 192 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 9, 1984

    Cox, seeks a writ of mandamus requiring respondent Unemployment Compensation Board of Review to hear and determine his claim for unemployment benefits for the week ending May 8, 1982, which said board has declined to hear … See California Dept. of Human Resources Development v. Java (1971), 402 U.S. 121 . In this case, no hearing has even been scheduled. No justification for such extreme delay has been demonstrated. A writ must issue.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Wulf v. Bravo Brio Restaurant Group, Inc.

    2019 Ohio 3434 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 2019

    See Sickles v. Jackson Cty. Hwy. Dept., 196 Ohio App.3d 703, 2011-Ohio-6102, ¶ 7 (4th Dist.); Meadowwood Manor, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Health, 12th Dist. Brown No. … Brown-Spurgeon v. Paul Davis Systems of Tri-State Area, Inc., 12th Dist. Clermont No.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • 5411 v. City of Columbus, Unpublished Decision (3-31-2003)

    Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2003

    . {¶ 2} On December 13, 2001, the city of Columbus, Board of Zoning Adjustment ("BZA") conducted a hearing on the appeal. … BROWN and KLATT, JJ., concur.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Hamer v. Limbach

    75 Ohio App. 3d 633 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 1991

    The Board of Tax Appeals erred in that it did not find that the plan of reorganization under the bankruptcy act was virtually identical to the plan which existed in the case of Lucas v. … Weiss v. Porterfield (1971), 27 Ohio St.2d 117 , 56 O.O.2d 65 , 271 N.E.2d 792 ; Lenart v. Lindley (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 110 , 15 O.O.3d 152 , 399 N.E.2d 1222 ; Kihm v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • In re Application to Dissolve the Mansfield Railway, Light & Power Co.

    3 Ohio App. 253 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1914

    internal affairs of the company, and that is, for something over a year the local company furnished the Southwestern with current; that growing out of this service credits accrued in favor of the local company in the sum of v$16,000 … of directors in the case of Kleybolte & Co. et al. v.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • In Re Single County Ditch

    50 Ohio App. 2d 114 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 2, 1976

    See also Jones v. Bd. of County Commrs. (1952), 94 Ohio App. 411, 416 . … Ohio Contract Carriers Ass’n, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission (1942), 140 Ohio St. 160 , 42 N. E. 2d 758 .

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • McKee v. Liming

    31 Ohio App. 303 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 18, 1928

    Klein v. Lust, 110 OS. 197 . The chapter of the code beginning with Section 11268 GC., fixes generally the counties in which actions may be brought. … Ohio, this action was properly brought in Brown County, and this is wholly independent of Section 6308 GC.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • State Ex Rel. Simmons v. Geauga County Department of Emergency Services

    131 Ohio App. 3d 482 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1998

    Welco Industries, Inc. v. Applied Cos. (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 344 , 617 N.E.2d 1129 . … Manson v. Morris (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 440, 441 , 613 N.E.2d 232, 233-234 .

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Shadoan v. Summit Cty. Ch. Serv. Bd., Unpublished Decision (10-29-2003)

    2003 Ohio 5775 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 2003

    Shadoan, Administrator of the Estate of Megan Haley Shadoan, appeals from the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas which granted the motion for summary judgment of Appellees, Summit County Children Services Board … Viock v.

    Cited 18 timesUnpublished
  • Yellow Cab of Cleveland, Inc. v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority

    72 Ohio App. 3d 558 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 1991

    The board may let the contract to the lowest and best bidder. * * *” 3 (Emphasis added.) The standard of review under manifest weight was set forth in C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. … Clough & Co., v. Comm. (1881), 36 Ohio St. 326 ; State, ex rel. Walton, v. Hermann (1900), 63 Ohio St. 440 , 59 N.E. 104 ; State, ex rel. Cleveland Trinidad Paving Co., v.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Costin v. Midwest Vision Partners, L.L.C.

    2024 Ohio 463 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 2024

    Costin”), is a board- certified oculoplastic surgeon. On September 13, 2017, Dr. Costin entered into an Employment Agreement with defendant-appellant, Cleveland Eye Clinic. … Sanford-Brown College, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 97261, 2012- Ohio-1543, ¶ 7. 2.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Welch Avenue Freewill Baptist Church v. Kinney

    10 Ohio App. 3d 196 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 1983

    attached to such buildings necessary for the proper occupancy, use, and enjoyment thereof * * * shall be exempt from taxation. * * *” In construing this section, the Supreme Court in Holy Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church v. … Likewise, the board’s finding that appellant has not demonstrated a *198 right to exemption under R.C. 5709.07 is neither unreasonable nor unlawful.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Ferritto v. City of Twinsburg, Unpublished Decision (3-19-2003)

    Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 2003

    On October 19, 2000, appellant filed a complaint for declaratory judgment against appellee and the Summit County Board of Elections ("the Board") regarding the validity of City of Twinsburg Ordinance 68-2000 providing for … Gyurcik v. Brown (1964), 176 Ohio St. 288 , 27 Ohio Op.2d 200 , 199 N.E.2d 596 , and State ex rel. Santora v.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Worldnet Software Co. v. Gannett Satellite Information Network, Inc.

    122 Ohio App. 3d 499 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 5, 1997

    New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), 376 U.S. 254, 267 , 84 S.Ct. 710, 719 , 11 L.Ed.2d 686, 698-699 . See, also, Stow v. Coville (1994), 96 Ohio App.3d 70 , 644 N.E.2d 673 ; Lambert v. … That the plaintiffs "bill [themselves] as the next great on-line service, but [they're] just a small computer bulletin board in the Miami area”; e.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • State v. Walton

    2021 Ohio 3958 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 2021

    Id., citing State v. Brown, 12th Dist. Clermont No. CA2001-04-047, 2001 WL 1567340, *5-6 (Dec. 10, 2001), in turn citing Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 436-437, 111 S. Ct. 2382, (1991). … Id., citing Brown at *6; United States v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Robinson v. Richter, Unpublished Decision (5-27-2004)

    2004 Ohio 2716 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 27, 2004

    Robinson and Edward V. … Sun Refining Marketing Co. v. Brennan (1987), 31 Ohio St.3d 306 , 511 N.E.2d 112 , syllabus.

    Cited 4 timesUnpublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.