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

Opinion Search Filter Settings
Use standard search logic for the Opinion Text Search (full-text search). To search the entire web site click here
Opinion Text Search:   What is Opinion Text Search?
Search Truncation Warning:
Source:    What is a Source?
Year Decided From:
Year Decided To:    What is Year Decided?
Year Decided Range Warning:
County:    What is County?
Case Number:    What is Case Number?
Author:    What is Author?
Topics and Issues:    What are Topics and Issues?
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 252 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State ex rel. Croston v. Alliance Castings Co. 15AP-937Magistrate's Decision adopted, with exception. The magistrate otherwise appropriately found that relator failed to establish the commission had abused its discretion in refusing to exercise continuing jurisdiction and to determine relator was entitled to an additional period of permanent partial disability compensation. Writ of mandamus denied.BrunnerFranklin 7/20/2017 7/20/2017 2017-Ohio-6900
Retirement Mgt. Co. v. Nsong 15AP-876The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's Civ. R. 60(B) motion to vacate judgment. Forcible entry and detainer action was appropriate in evicting business owner of senior living real estate who had made it her residence and where agreements permitted cognovit note to enforce debt. All assignments of error overruled. Judgment of the trial court affirmed.BrunnerFranklin 7/18/2017 7/18/2017 2017-Ohio-5869
In re C.D. 16AP-779 & 16AP784Judgment affirmed. Because R.C. 2151.36 does not require a motion for child support to be filed before a child's commitment, the child support agency's motion for support was not untimely. The timing of the motion did not violate due process or the principle of "finality" in child support proceedings as discussed in Meyer v. Meyer, 17 Ohio St.3d 222 (1985). Although the trial court erred by not informing appellants of their right to counsel at the outset of proceedings, the error was harmless because appellants were appointed counsel by the trial court as soon as the child support agency filed the motion for support, which is the only ruling they challenge on appeal. The trial court did not err when it ordered child support under R.C. 2151.36, even though one parent was a victim of the offense that resulted in the child's delinquency adjudication, because an order of support is mandatory and the statute does not provide an exception based on the identity of the victim. Finally, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it did not deviate the amount of child support owed to zero and only adjusted in downwards by because it fully considered the factors required under R.C. 3119.23 to justify the support amount.HortonFranklin 7/18/2017 7/18/2017 2017-Ohio-5870
State v. Foster 17AP-106Trial court did not err by denying appellant's third application for DNA testing which sought testing of items appellant had already sought testing of and which the trial court had already considered and rejected because DNA testing would not be outcome determinative, a ruling that had been affirmed on appeal.KlattFranklin 7/13/2017 7/13/2017 2017-Ohio-5820
State v. Martin 17AP-6No error in dismissing untimely petition for postconviction relief.KlattFranklin 6/30/2017 6/30/2017 2017-Ohio-5657
State ex rel. Wolfe v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. 17AP-186Because Wolfe did not comply with R.C. 2969.25(C)(1), we sua sponte dismiss Wolfe's request for a writ of mandamus.Luper SchusterFranklin 6/30/2017 6/30/2017 2017-Ohio-5658
CACH, L.L.C. v. Alderman 15AP-980The trial court did not err in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment because appellee submitted the necessary documents to establish a prima facie case in an action to recover on an account.HortonFranklin 6/29/2017 6/29/2017 2017-Ohio-5597
State v. Williams 16AP-540Appellant's conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Trial court did not commit plain error in finding that prior juvenile robbery adjudication constituted a disability for purpose of appellant's conviction for having a weapon under disability. Trial court did not commit plain error in only granting appellant 20 days of jail credit as indicated by appellant to be correct in the trial court. Appellant failed to establish ineffective assistance of trial counsel.DorrianFranklin 6/29/2017 6/29/2017 2017-Ohio-5598
State v. Pyfrom 16AP-590Issues raised in Anders brief not meritorious; judgment of conviction and sentence entered pursuant to appellant's guilty plea affirmed.BrownFranklin 6/29/2017 6/29/2017 2017-Ohio-5599
DeWine v. Morgan 16AP-592The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment.BrownFranklin 6/29/2017 6/29/2017 2017-Ohio-5600