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 398 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Hoover-Moore 14AP-1049Trial court decision to deny motion for new trial was not an abuse of discretion; purported newly discovered evidence did not warrant the granting of a new trial.KlattFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4863
Dietrich v. Dobos 15AP-2The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for leave to file a late answer under Civ.R. 6(B)(2) where defendant's alleged mental disorder did not excuse his failure to timely file an answer.KlattFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4866
State ex rel. Montevideo v. Indus. Comm. 15AP-43Having decided that its staff hearing officer SHO had made a clear mistake of law in failing to address whether relator voluntarily had retired in 1995, the Industrial Commission did not abuse its discretion in exercising continuing jurisdiction to reach the merits of relator's application for permanent total disability compensation, or by considering non-medical disability factors supporting denial of PTD compensation.BrunnerFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4867
State ex rel. Black v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., 15AP-120Upon review of the magistrate's decision, an independent review of the record, and due consideration of relator's objections, this court finds that the magistrate properly determined the pertinent facts and applied the appropriate law. Relator's objections to the magistrate's decision are overruled, and the magistrate's decision is adopted, including the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained therein. Accordingly, the requested writ of mandamus is denied.DorrianFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4868
State v. Robinette 15AP-255Trial court substantially complied with Crim.R. 11(C)(2) in accepting appellant's guilty plea to operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol.Brown, P.J.Franklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4869
State v. Schoengerger 15AP-451R.C. 2953.36 forbids application for sealing of a conviction for an offense of violence that is a felony violation of R.C. 2903.13. Reversed and remanded with instructions to deny the application for sealing.BrunnerFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4870
State v. Gordon 15AP-690Defendant's convictions and sentence were not void. Affirmed.BrunnerFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4871
Rohrer v. State 15AP-697Common pleas court was correct to dismiss lawsuit which primarily named state agents and entities as defendants. Immunity determinations had not been made by the Ohio Court of Claims. The non-state defendants also had the complaint properly dismissed for other reasons.TyackFranklin 11/24/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4872
State v. Black 15AP-539Where an offender completes community service after being unsuccessfully terminated from probation, the offender must still wait to apply for sealing of her records three years under R.C. 2953.32. Reversed and remanded with instructions to the trial court to dismiss the application without prejudice to refiling after the expiration of the waiting period.BrunnerFranklin 11/20/2015 11/20/2015 2015-Ohio-4256
Arnold v. Columbus 14AP-418Summary judgment appropriately granted for claims of false light invasion of privacy and public records destruction. But genuine issue of material fact as to spoliation of evidence precluded summary judgment as to that claim.TyackFranklin 11/17/2015 11/24/2015 2015-Ohio-4873