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 243 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Navarro WD-14-081Trial court acted within its discretion when it denied a surety's motion to reinstate previously revoked surety bond posting privileges.JensenWood 8/28/2015 8/28/2015 2015-Ohio-3516
State v. Matthews WD-14-059Trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing to determine whether appellant was an "eligible offender" for purposes of expungement statute where there was a question as to whether a previous offense qualified as a conviction.PietrykowskiWood 8/28/2015 8/28/2015 2015-Ohio-3517
Krueger v. Swineford E-14-095A promissory note and mortgage with a right of first refusal securing commercial property, was too vague to be enforceable.PietrykowskiErie 8/28/2015 8/28/2015 2015-Ohio-3518
State v. Cruz WD-14-085Appellant's sentence was not contrary to law where it was within the permissible statutory range and the trial court considered the principles and purposes of sentencing under R.C. 2929.11 and the seriousness and recidivism factors under R.C. 2929.12.YarbroughWood 8/28/2015 8/28/2015 2015-Ohio-3519
Afjeh v. Ottawa Hills L-14-1267Trial court granting appellee's Civ.R. 56(C) motion for summary judgment upheld as appellant failed to show a genuine issue of material fact existed that would negate appellee's immunity granted for being an employee of a political subdivision. Appellant failed to show appellee acted outside the scope of her employment, acted with a malicious purpose, in bad faith, or committed wanton or reckless conduct.YarbroughLucas 8/26/2015 8/27/2015 2015-Ohio-3483
Toledo v. Phillips L-14-1016Appellant's convictions for obstructing official business and criminal trespass affirmed. Because there is no arguable issue for appeal, appellant's counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.PietrykowskiLucas 8/26/2015 8/27/2015 2015-Ohio-3484
Cordy v. Schwaderer OT-14-046Despite declining to make a finding of contempt against mother who prevented father from exercising two weeks of summer visitation with children, the trial court acted within its discretion and reached an equitable result when it ordered compensatory visitation to make father whole.JensenOttawa 8/21/2015 8/21/2015 2015-Ohio-3393
Prudential v. Cushman H-15-002For cases outside of R.C. 5815.33(B)(1), clear and specific language to set aside property, such as insurance policies, as "sole" and "separate" in an agreement or divorce decree is sufficient to divest a divorced party of its beneficiary interest in that property.SingerHuron 8/21/2015 8/21/2015 2015-Ohio-3394
State v. Brown F-14-005The giving of correct and accurate jury instructions largely by the prosecutor in an effort to clarify and assist the trial court, did not prejudice appellant. Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise the un-recognized partial defense of diminished capacity.PietrykowskiFulton 8/21/2015 8/21/2015 2015-Ohio-3395
State v. Chaney L-14-1161Appellant found guilty of felonious assault with firearm specification. Trial counsel rendered effective assistance in accordance with appellant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Conviction supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Affirmed.SingerLucas 8/14/2015 8/17/2015 2015-Ohio-3293