| Case No. | Case Caption | Case Status | Date
Accepted | Case Issue |
|
2020-0625
|
State of Ohio
v.
Miquan D. Hubbard
|
OPEN
|
7/1/2020
| Does retroactive application of the violent offender database enrollment statutes codified in sections 2903.41 through 2903.44 of the Revised Code, commonly known as "Sierah's Law," violate the Retroactivity Clause of the Ohio Constitution, as set forth in Article II, Section 28 of the Ohio Constitution? |
|
2020-0549
|
State of Ohio
v.
Albert Jarvis
|
OPEN
|
7/1/2020
| Whether Ohio's sub S.B. 231, "Sierah's Law," [R.C. 2903.42, et. seq.], creating a violent offender database, which became effective March 20, 2019, violates Section 28, Article II of the Ohio Constitution, Ohio's constitutional prohibition on retroactive statutes when retroactively applied to an offense that occurred before March 20, 2019. |
|
2020-0544
|
State of Ohio
v.
Miquan Hubbard
|
OPEN
|
7/1/2020
| The retroactive application of Senate Bill 231—Sierah’s Law—is
unconstitutional as applied to offenses committed prior to the effective
date of the statute. Section 28, Article II of the Ohio Constitution
A. Sierah’s Law affects a substantial right because it imposes new
duties and obligations that did not exist before its enactment.
B. Ohio appellate courts have issued conflicting opinions regarding the
constitutionality of the retroactive application of Sierah’s Law. |
|
2020-0495
|
State of Ohio
v.
Leandre Jordan
|
OPEN
|
7/7/2020
| Under R.C. 2935.04, once probable cause is established, a
warrantless arrest is unconstitutional if there is unreasonable delay in effecting the arrest.
Whether the delay is reasonable depends upon the circumstances surrounding the delay and the
nature of the offense. |
|
2020-0433
|
Richmond Mill, Inc. et al
v.
Margaret Aloe Ferraro, et. al.
|
OPEN
(Held)
|
7/7/2020
|
APPELLANTS' PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 1
Proposition of Law No. 1: Reunification of severed mineral interests with the surface estate in
Ohio, is governed by the specific provisions of the Marketable Title Act found at
R.C. 5301.56-Mineral Interests- vesting in surface owners. (Commonly referred to as the Dormant
Mineral Act or "DMA") rather than the general provisions of the Marketable Title Act.
|
|
2020-0433
|
Richmond Mill, Inc. et al
v.
Margaret Aloe Ferraro, et. al.
|
OPEN
(Held)
|
7/7/2020
| PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. I: Section 5301.51(B) of the Revised Code
requires the party seeking to preserve the property interest at issue to prove that
he or she physically possessed the property interest during the entirety of the
forty-year period provided in statute |
|
2020-0433
|
Richmond Mill, Inc. et al
v.
Margaret Aloe Ferraro, et. al.
|
OPEN
(Held)
|
7/7/2020
| PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. II: In order for a property owner to benefit
from possession of the property interest under R.C. 5301.51(B), the owner
must prove that the chain of title during the relevant forty-year period of
possession does not contain an instrument purporting to convey the property
interest. |
|
2020-0433
|
Richmond Mill, Inc. et al
v.
Margaret Aloe Ferraro, et. al.
|
OPEN
(Held)
|
7/7/2020
| PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. III: The date marketability is being determined
under the MTA cannot be when a surface owner of real property filed a
contested affidavit of abandonment under the DMA |
|
2020-0415
|
State of Ohio
v.
Khairi A. Bond
|
OPEN
|
7/7/2020
| PROPOSITION OF LAW 1:
THE TRIAL COURT DID NOT VIOLATE APPELLEE'S SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO PUBLIC TRIAL BY PARTIALLY
LIMITING ACCESS TO THE COURTROOM AFTER AN ALTERCATION DISRUPTED COURT PROCEEDINGS.
|
|
2020-0405
|
AKC, Inc., dba Cleantech
v.
United Specialty Insurance Company, et al.
|
OPEN
|
6/23/2020
| PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. I: The standard water backup and pollution
exclusions in a first-party property insurance policy bar loss caused by or
resulting from raw sewage |
|