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 294 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Jones OT-14-042Appellant's guilty plea waived any error in arguing the sufficiency of the evidence and he was properly informed of his notification requirements as a Tier II Sexual Offender. Venue; sexual gratification; R.C. Chapter 2950; contrary to law.PietrykowskiOttawa 10/9/2015 10/9/2015 2015-Ohio-4209
Rather v. Rather E-13-071Trial court did not err in modifying father's visitation rights to supervised visitation. PietrykowskiErie 10/9/2015 10/9/2015 2015-Ohio-4210
State v. Rybarczyk WD-15-020; WD-15-021Trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing on the motion to seal record. Case remanded to trial court for hearing.SingerWood 10/9/2015 10/9/2015 2015-Ohio-4211
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Myers F-14-011The trial court properly concluded that a single phone call from mortgagor to the bank's counsel in which she did not express an intention to defend the lawsuit did not suffice to constitute an appearance for purposes of the Civ.R. 55(A) seven-day notice requirement.JensenFulton 10/9/2015 10/9/2015 2015-Ohio-4212
Wetli v. Bugbee & Conkle, L.L.P. L-15-1009Trial court did not err in staying proceedings pending arbitration in action brought by retiring partner of law firm against the firm and its other partners for the buyout of the retiring partner's interest in partnership property under the Uniform Partnership Act, where the partnership agreement contained a broad arbitration clause and the litigation of the statutory claims would require application of the agreement's definition of partnership property.YarbroughLucas 10/6/2015 10/9/2015 2015-Ohio-4213
In re Kai.F. L-15-1119Trial court's decision to grant permanent custody to appellee Lucas County Children Services was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Appellant's appointed counsel satisfied the requirements in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); this appeal lacks merit and is wholly frivolous. Appointed counsel's request to withdraw is granted.OsowikLucas 10/6/2015 10/9/2015 2015-Ohio-4208
Dunn v. Heineman's Winery OT-14-044Business invitee brought trip and fall action against winery. The Ottawa County Court of Common Pleas granted winery's motion for summary judgment asserting the hazard over which she tripped was open and obvious. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.JensenOttawa 9/30/2015 10/1/2015 2015-Ohio-4054
Toledo v. Ebraheim L-14-1157Trial court did not err by denying a motion to dismiss a complaint that was filed after trial, and where the complaint contained enough information to give appellant fair notice of the charge against him. Sufficient evidence was presented at trial to support appellant's conviction for vehicular manslaughter, and the trial court's conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.OsowikLucas 9/30/2015 10/1/2015 2015-Ohio-4055
Emery v. State Farm Ins. S-15-010Sua sponte dismissal of contract claims against insurer was in error where the claims were filed within the applicable eight-year statute of limitations. Excusable neglect under Civ.R. 6(B) does not apply to failure to file within the statute of limitations.PietrykowskiSandusky 9/30/2015 10/1/2015 2015-Ohio-4056
Fantozz v. Cordle E-14-130Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion to intervene in tax foreclosure action, where motion was filed four years after the judgment entry. Appellant's motion was also barred by doctrine of lis pendens which prohibits a third party from acquiring an interest in the property, as against the plaintiff's title, while an action is pending.JensenErie 9/30/2015 10/1/2015 2015-Ohio-4057