Seal of the State of Ohio. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. Line Drawing of the Ohio Judicial Center. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page.
Spacer image

The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System

Reporter of Decisions - Opinions & Announcements

Opinion Search Filter Settings
Use standard search logic for the full-text search.
Opinion Text Search:    What is Opinion Text Search?
Source:   What is a Source?
Year Decided:   What is Decided?
County:   What is Decided?
Case Number:   What is Case Number?
Author:   What is Decided?
Topics and Issues:   What is Decided?
WebCite No: -Ohio-   What is a Web Cite No.? WebCite and Citation are unique document searches. If a value is entered in the WebCite or Citation field, all other search filters are ignored. If values are entered in both the WebCite and Citation fields, only the WebCite search filter is applied.
Citation:    What is Citation?
This search returned 21 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
In re J.R. 1-14-22The trial court did not err in granting legal custody of the minor child to the child's paternal grandmother because there is competent, credible evidence that it is in the minor child's best interest and because the children's services agency made reasonable efforts toward reunification.PrestonAllen 2/23/2015 2/23/2015 2015-Ohio-643
State v. Miller 17-13-24Miller never asserted, in any manner, his desire to testify, therefore we can find no error in the record on the basis that Miller had been "prevented from testifying."ShawShelby 2/23/2015 2/23/2015 2015-Ohio-644
State v. Hosko 13-14-23Trial court's ruling on motion to suprress not error where consent was voluntarily expressed through words and actions.ShawSeneca 2/17/2015 2/17/2015 2015-Ohio-570
State v. Brennco, Inc. 1-14-24The trial court properly overruled motion to dismiss and motion to suppress where the municipal court had jurisdiction, there was no ambiguity in the statute, and the exception of R.C. 6111.04(F)(3), which allows for farming activities causing runoff or pollution by animal waste as long as they do not violate the CWA, did not absolve defendant from liability.WillamowskiAllen 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 2015-Ohio-467
State v. Brown 8-14-04Trial court did not err in revoking Brown's community control. However, Brown was not notified of PRC, therefore this case is reversed for that limited issue.ShawLogan 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 2015-Ohio-468
Lump v. Larson 8-14-14The trial court's conclusion that defendant-appellant failed to prove tortious interference with business relationships was supported by some competent, credible evidence and therefore not against the manifest weight of the evidence.PrestonLogan 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 2015-Ohio-469
Dept. of Natural Resources v. Knapke Trust 10-13-25Even assuming cumulative error applies in civil cases, ODNR unable to establish multiple prejudicial errors, or in the event of multiple errors, any one or more deprived ODNR of a fair trial so as to warrant reversal.ShawMercer 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 2015-Ohio-470
Dept. of Natural Resources v. Ebbing 10-13-24Plaintiff-Appellant, the State of Ohio, Department of Natural Resources ("ODNR"), appeals the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Mercer County entering a jury verdict in favor of Defendants-Appellees, Stanley ("Stanley") and Vicki ("Vicki") Ebbing (collectively "the Ebbings") in an amount of $764,518 in compensation for ODNR taking a permanent flowage easement on the Ebbings' property. On appeal, ODNR argues that the trial court erred by: (1) denying its request for a jury view; (2) admitting certain exhibits and testimony proffered by the Ebbings while excluding certain evidence proffered by ODNR; and (3) providing prejudicial jury instructions. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the trial court's judgment.RogersMercer 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 2015-Ohio-471
In re L.H. 17-14-09Appellant-Mother, Amber Price ("Amber"), appeals the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Shelby County, Juvenile Division, denying her legal custody of her minor child, L.H. On appeal, Amber argues that the trial court erred by failing to issue a case plan and by denying her motion for legal custody when its decision was not supported by competent, credible evidence. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.RogersShelby 2/2/2015 2/2/2015 2015-Ohio-369
State v. Baumle 11-14-06Defendant-appellant's theft conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence or based on insufficient evidence. That the defendant-appellant did not intend to permanently deprive the victim of her debit card was of no consequence. The defendant-appellant purposely deprived the victim of her debit card as "deprived" is used in R.C. 2913.01(C). A debit card is included in the meaning of "credit card" under R.C. 2913.01(U) and R.C. 2913.71.PrestonPaulding 1/26/2015 1/26/2015 2015-Ohio-220