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 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:   What is Year Decided?
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 8 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Hurt v. Liberty Twp. 2016-00856-PQPublic Records Act; R.C. 2743.75; R.C. 149.43(B); motion to dismiss; Civ.R. 12(B)(6). First, the special master determined that requesters stated allegations, if proven, may entitle them to relief under R.C. 2743.75 for denial of access to public records. Second, the special master concluded that notes created by an investigator were public records pursuant to R.C. 149.43(A), and the Township's failure to provide the notes in response to requesters' public records requests was a violation of R.C. 149.43(B). The special master recommended that defendant's motion to dismiss be denied, and requesters' claim be granted with respect to the investigator's notes.Clark  2/22/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-825
Eschborn v. Ohio Dept. of Transp. 2016-00171Summary judgment; Civ.R. 56; wrongful termination; gender; R.C. 4112.99. The court determined that plaintiff provided no direct evidence of discrimination, and did not plead in her complaint or otherwise provide evidence that she was replaced by a non-protected individual. Finally, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that a similarly-situated person was treated differently than she was. Summary judgment granted in favor of defendant.Crawford  2/21/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-824
Pool v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. 2015-00587Inmate; excessive force; assault; battery; negligence. The magistrate concluded that plaintiff failed to obey an order from a corrections officer, appeared to be in the process of actively destroying property tying him to a violation of prison rules, and plaintiff pushed the corrections officer, thus the corrections officer was justified and privileged to use force as may have reasonably appeared to be necessary. The degree of force used was not excessive and satisfied the duty of reasonable care. Judgement recommended in favor of defendant.Van Schoyck  2/3/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-823
Mirlisena v. Miami Univ. 2015-00190Summary judgment; Civ.R. 56; negligence; sexual assault. The court found that there was no support for a special relationship between the university and plaintiff to create a duty to protect plaintiff, and even if there was a type of special relationship with plaintiff necessary to create a duty to protect, since her attacker's criminal acts were not foreseeable the university could not have violated that duty. Summary judgment granted in favor of defendant.McGrath  1/30/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-822
Estrada v. Univ. of Toledo Med. Ctr. 2012-07218Wrongful death; medical malpractice; trial. The magistrate concluded that the diagnosis, care and treatment rendered by defendant's medical professionals leading up to plaintiff's decedent's cardiac arrest complied with the standard of care. The magistrate found defendant's expert testimony more persuasive and supported by medical evidence than plaintiff's expert testimony. Judgment recommended in favor of defendant.Van Schoyck  1/26/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-821
Lidrbauch v. Wright State Univ. Boonshoft School of Med. 2016-00330Civil immunity; R.C. 2743.02(F); R.C. 9.86; state employee. The magistrate determined that Dr. Janice M. Duke, M.D. was a state employee and engaged in her duties under her Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine contract as a state employee when she rendered medical care to two plaintiffs from December 4, 2004 to June 30, 2005. The magistrate recommended that Dr. Duke was entitled to immunity pursuant to R.C. 9.86 and 2743.02(F), and the courts of common pleas do not have jurisdiction over any civil actions that may be filed against her based upon the allegations in this case.Shaver  1/10/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-820
Zavinski v. Ohio Dept. of Transp. 2013-00452Third-party Negligence; objection; Civ.R. 53; motor vehicle accident; R.C. 2307.23(A). The court concluded that the tractor-trailer operator's conduct was an independent, separate act of negligence which directly caused Zavinski's accident and the magistrate appropriately considered this when apportioning the percentage of tortious conduct attributable to ODOT. Second, the magistrate properly apportioned equal blame on both ODOT and the driver because they were concurrent causes of Zavinski's death. The court adopted the magistrate's decision and recommendation as its own, including conclusions of law contained therein. Judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff.McGrath  1/5/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-818
Givens v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. 2016-00324Summary judgment; Civ.R. 56; inmate; independent contractor. The court found no issue of material fact surrounding the relationship between Correction Corporation of America and defendant, and the relationship was one of an independent contractor rather than an agency relationship. As Lake Erie Correctional Institution is owned, operated, and maintained by CCA, ODRC is not liable for the alleged negligent acts of CCA's staff. Summary judgment granted in favor of defendant.McGrath  1/5/2017 3/7/2017 2017-Ohio-819