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 314 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State ex rel. Allah-U-Akbar v. Ashtabula Cty. Court of Common Pleas 2017-A-0035EXTRAORDINARY WRITS - writ of mandamus; writ of prohibition; relator's belated affidavit of prior civil actions filed weeks after he filed his petition does not save it from dismissal; relator was not entitled to writ of prohibition because state's nolle of aggravated robbery case did not divest court of jurisdiction to enter final judgment in unrelated murder case; relator was also not entitled to writ of mandamus because he was not entitled to final judgment in murder case reflecting his acquittal in the unrelated robbery case because state simply nolled the robbery case.Per CuriamAshtabula 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8625
State ex rel. Allah-U-Akbar v. Ashtabula Cty. Court of Common Pleas 2017-A-0046EXTRAORDINARY WRITS - writ of mandamus; relator's belated affidavit of prior civil actions filed two weeks after he filed his petition does not save it from dismissal; relator was not entitled to writ of mandamus regarding the disclosure of public records because, as a convicted person, he was required but failed to obtain the court order required by R.C. 149.43(B)(8) in order to obtain public records concerning a criminal investigation or prosecution.Per CuriamAshtabula 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8626
State v. Lusane 2017-P-0066APPELLATE REVIEW - App.R. 5(A); delayed appeal; not diligent in taking the proper steps to protect his own rights; reasons do not justify length of time to appeal.WrightPortage 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8628
State v. Croff 2017-T-0005CRIMINAL LAW - fifth-degree felony possession of cocaine; alleged speedy trial violation following mistrial; R.C. 2945.71 applies to initial adjudication; de novo review of delays based on constitutional reasonableness; Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; probable cause for stop; determination at to whether stop was unreasonably delayed to conduct a dog sniff is not before us because appellant ran away during pat down search, which he does not challenge; trial court's exclusion of officer's canine use reports was proper. WrightTrumbull 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8629
Rudzik Excavating, Inc. v. Mahoning Valley Sanit. Dist. 2017-T-0008CONTRACTS - public construction contracts; fixed-price contracts set one price for the project as a whole, while unit-price contract sets price per unit, but does not set number of units; contract documents as a whole demonstrate contract is ambiguous as to whether it was a unit-price contract or a fixed-price contract; government's acceptance of bid knowing it did not comply with unit-price formula in bid proposal form militated against a unit-price interpretation; instruction to bidders to add all necessary costs to arrive at total cost supported fixed-price interpretation; because it was unclear whether the parties intended contract to be unit-price or fixed-price contract, contract was ambiguous and court did not err in finding a question of fact existed as to parties' intent and in denying government's motion for directed verdict.RiceTrumbull 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8630
State v. Watson 2017-T-0047CRIMINAL LAW - Jail-time credit; R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(g)(iii); multiple post-judgment motions; no direct appeal from denial of first motion; res judicata.WrightTrumbull 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8631
Tredenary v. Fritz 2017-L-045DOMESTIC RELATIONS - GENERAL - domestic violence civil protection order; trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying petition where trial court found defendant (who testified he used no violence against plaintiff) to be more credible than plaintiff or her witness; plaintiff failed to present competent, credible evidence that defendant attempted to cause or recklessly caused her bodily injury; and, despite plaintiff's testimony that defendant seriously injured her, she had no visible injuries.RiceLake 11/20/2017 11/20/2017 2017-Ohio-8632
State v. Alex 2016-A-0055CRIMINAL LAW - opinion testimony; witness veracity; child sexual abuse victim; delayed disclosure; inconsistent statements. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL - failure to object; questioning on cross-examination; trial strategy.CannonAshtabula 11/13/2017 11/13/2017 2017-Ohio-8527
State v. Erich 2016-A-0056INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL - guilty plea; knowing and voluntary nature of plea; Crim.R. 11(C); failure to file motion to suppress; failure to adequately examine evidence; evidence de hors the record. APPELLATE REVIEW - App.R. 4(A); delayed appeal; jurisdiction.CannonWarren 11/13/2017 11/13/2017 2017-Ohio-8528
Ritchey v. JP Morgan Chase Bank 2016-L-130CIVIL PROCEDURE - Voluntary dismissal without prejudice filed after trial court's journalized decision granting summary judgment on all claims is a nullity. Civ.R. 41(A); implicit in the right to voluntary dismiss, is the requirement that the claims are pending; prior litigation between same parties involving same note and mortgage precludes subsequent lawsuit for claims that could have been raised; res judicata.WrightLake 11/13/2017 11/13/2017 2017-Ohio-8529