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 274 rows. Rows per page: 
12345678910...>>
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Gateway Consultants Group, Inc. v. Premier Physicians Ctrs., Inc. 104014Damages; new trial; JNOV; de novo; abuse of discretion; estimation of damages; breach of contract; prejudgment interest; Civ.R. 50; Civ.R. 59; misconduct; irregularity; passion or prejudice; manifest weight; error of law; contrary to law; remittitur. The jury's award of damages in a breach of contract action was not supported in the record. However, that award was not based on passion or prejudice and, with the prevailing party's acceptance, the award of damages and prejudgment interest is reduced through remittitur and affirmed as modified.CelebrezzeCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1443
State v. Patterson 104266Preindictment delay, joinder and severance, insufficient evidence, and allied offenses. The trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to dismiss for preindictment delay because the appellant could not establish a viable, tangible connection between what T.T.'s mother could testify to and his defense. The trial court did not err when it denied the appellant's motion to sever because he could not establish that he was prejudiced by the state's decision to prosecute all of the cases together. There was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of rape because after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court did not err when it did not merge the appellant's rape and kidnapping convictions because the offenses were dissimilar in import or significance and caused separate, identifiable harm, were committed separately, and were committed with separate animus or motivation.Laster MaysCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1444
State v. Alexander 104281Crim.R. 29, motion for acquittal; R.C. 2945.59, Evid.R. 404(b), evidence of motive, intent, prior acts; R.C. 2929.14, HB 86, consecutive sentences; R.C. 2929.18, R.C. 2929.19(B)(5), R.C. 2947.14, imposition of court costs, indigency, community work service, manifest weight, sufficiency of evidence. The evidence was not insufficient, and the jury's verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, to find appellant guilty of aggravated murder, attempted murder, and related charges where the indictments included complicity charges where the evidence included testimony by the brother who had known the defendants for several years and the codefendant possessed a key to the apartment. Appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice by the trial court's admission of testimony by homicide detectives that victim's statements were consistent, or by gang unit officer's testimony providing general information about gangs in the Cleveland area, particularly where the defense injected the possibility of gang war activity. Trial court properly ordered payment of court costs by community work service.Laster MaysCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1445
State v. Rance 104619Presentence motion to withdraw guilty plea; ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion to withdraw guilty plea because the appellant was represented by a highly competent counsel; the appellant was afforded a full hearing, pursuant to Crim.R. 11, before he entered the plea; after the motion to withdraw is filed, the appellant was given a complete and impartial hearing on the motion; and the record reveals that the court gave full and fair consideration to the plea withdrawal request. The appellant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel because appellant's counsel's performance was not deficient.Laster MaysCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1446
Lytle v. Mathew 104622Motion to disqualify; conflict of interest; crime-fraud exception; necessary witness; abuse of discretion; Prof.Cond.R. 3.7; Prof.Cond.R. 1.7; Prof.Cond.R. 1.10. Judgment affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it disqualified plaintiffs' counsel because the credibility of plaintiffs' counsel and her desire to deny wrongdoing created a conflict of interest and presented a substantial risk to her ability to carry out an appropriate course of action for plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' counsel was a necessary witness to the case. Therefore, the ability of plaintiffs' counsel to consider, recommend, or carry out an appropriate course of action for her client, will be materially limited by her own personal interests.KilbaneCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1447
State v. Nickens 104670App.R. 16(A)(7); R.C. 2929.16(B); restitution; hearing; plain error; Crim.R. 52(B); ineffective assistance of counsel; invited error. Trial court properly applied R.C. 2929.16(B) to allow defendant the opportunity to serve jail term on weekends to allow her full-time employment. No hearing for restitution was required because defendant agreed to the amount. The trial court is not required to sua sponte inquire into the existence of insurance before imposing restitution.GallagherCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1448
State v. Lee 104682Murder; Joinder and Severance; Prospective Juror; Self-Defense; Prosecutorial Misconduct; Defense Closing Argument. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to sever charges; trial court did not commit prejudicial error in removing prospective juror for cause; self-defense instruction was not warranted; R.C. 2905.01 is not unconstitutional; convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence; prosecuting attorney did not commit reversible error in closing argument; trial court did not abuse its discretion in barring defense attorney from arguing self-defense.BlackmonCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1449
Mayer v. Mayer 104748Civ.R. 60(B)/motion for relief from judgment; post-decree litigation; hearing. Where issues of the parties' assets were still being resolved post-decree, the trial court abused its discretion by denying appellant's Civ.R. 60(B) motion without conducting a hearing.JonesCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1450
State v. Rogers 104814Operating a vehicle while under the influence; felony sentencing. Defendant's prison sentence of 60 days, to run consecutive to 30 months, affirmed for third-degree felony OVI, which was defendant's ninth DUI/OVI conviction.BlackmonCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1451
In re Seizure of Approximately $20,000 U.S. Currency 104850R.C. 2981.03(F)/return of seized property; untimely; R.C. 2981.11(A)/ongoing investigation. In accordance with R.C. 2981.03(F), the state failed to timely commence neither civil nor criminal forfeiture proceedings against petitioner's seized property. Additionally, the state's minimal assertion that an investigation was ongoing, and that appellee's property was germane to that investigation, was not sufficient to continue to maintain control over petitioner's property.JonesCuyahoga 4/20/2017 4/20/2017 2017-Ohio-1452
12345678910...>>