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 95 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Ireland 15AP-1134Pursuant to application of State v. Ireland, __ Ohio St.3d __, 2018-Ohio-4494, on remand from the Supreme Court of Ohio, the trial court did not err in instructing the jury that appellant’s defense of blackout resulting from PTSD (or insanity-related defense) was an affirmative defense that appellant had to prove by preponderance of the evidence. Furthermore, the remaining assignments of error, not previously considered prior to remand, were decided. The trial court did not err in permitting certain remarks by the prosecutor ,even if improper, as those remarks did not prejudicially affect the substantial rights of appellant. The trial court did not err in omitting from the verbal jury instructions the term “unconscious” as appellant did not argue that prejudice resulted therefrom and the term was included in the written instructions. The trial court did not commit plain error, when considering the context of the expert testimony, in permitting the expert to testify “the law requires***.” Finally, the trial court did not commit cumulative error. All assignments of error overruled. Judgment affirmed.DorrianFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1002
State ex rel. Ames v. Emp. Relations Bd. 17AP-380Relator's request for a writ of mandamus is denied as relator has not established a clear legal right to have her State Employment Relation's Board issue a probable cause finding on her unfair labor practice charge or a clear legal duty on the part of SERB to do so. Writ denied.DorrianFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1003
Columbia Gas Transm., L.L.C. v. The Ohio Valley Coal Co. 17AP-413The trial court correctly held that under Ohio's Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, defendant, an underground coal mine operator, was liable for subsidence damages to surface structures of plaintiff, a pipeline operator, but the trial court improperly excluded from the measure of damages those pre-mining mitigation expenses incurred to protect the pipeline and avoid catastrophic failure. Preventive measures incurred to reduce damage from anticipated and inevitable tortious conduct are compensable as a matter of judicial and economic effiency.BrownFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1004
State v. Wallace 17AP-818Trial court completely failed to comply with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(a) with respect to appellant's guilty plea to the charge of rape because court did not inform appellant of the sex offender classification, registration, and notification requirements that would result from conviction on that charge and there was no other basis on which the court could determine that appellant understood those penalties. Trial court did not commit plain error by failing to make a formal finding on the record that appellant was competent to stand trial or enter a plea because a mental evaluation ordered at the request of counsel found appellant to be competent, appellant's counsel stipulated to the mental evaluation report on two separate occasions, and there were no other indicia of incompetence in the record.DorrianFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1005
State ex rel. Honda of Am. Mfg., Inc. v. Indus. Comm. of Ohio 18AP-4Industrial Commission did not abuse its discretion in granting claimant's PTD application where the medical opinion relied on by the commission provided some evidence to support the commission's finding that claimant is incapable of sustained remunerative employment solely due to the allowed impairment. Because claimant was medically incapable of sustained remunerative employment due to the allowed impairment, the commission was not required to consider non-medical disability factors before granting PTD, including claimant's lack of participation in re-education and retraining. Writ denied.SadlerFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1006
State v. Groce 18AP-51There is insufficient evidence to support Groce’s conviction for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity and the attendant firearm specification. However, there is sufficient evidence to support Groce’s convictions for trafficking in cocaine, possession of cocaine, and illegal manufacture of drugs, and the attendant firearm specifications on these convictions. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in making its evidentiary rulings, the prosecutor’s statements in closing arguments did not deprive Groce of a fair trial, Groce did not receive the ineffective assistance of counsel, the trial court did not err in ruling on Groce’s Batson challenge, and the trial court did not err in determining which of Groce’s convictions merged with one another.SchusterFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1007
Izzo v. Dept. of Edn. 18AP-138The common pleas court did not abuse its discretion when it found the Ohio School Board's order was supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence.BrownFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1008
State v. Brightwell 18AP-243Trial court did not plainly err in instructing the jury on the weight and credibility afforded to accomplice testimony because the jury instruction given by the trial court substantially complied with the language required by R.C. 2923.03(D). Appellant's convictions of aggravated robbery, aggravated murder, and attempted murder were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1009
State v. Armengau 18AP-276The trial court did not err in denying appellant's presentence motion for dismissal "pursuant to Crim.R. 29 and the United States Constitution and the Ohio Constitution" filed after this court decided his direct appeal, affirming in part and reversing in part, and remanding only for resentencing particular counts and to address sex-offender classification. Appellant's assignments of error are overruled on the grounds of res judicata, law of the case, and on the merits, seeing no course to revisit the issues raised and previously addressed by this court's decision in appellant's direct appeal. Judgment affirmed.DorrianFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1010
Altercare of Canal Winchester Post-Acute Rehab. Ctr. v. Turner 18AP-466Trial court did not err in finding granddaughter of a former nursing facility resident not liable for breach of a personal guaranty where the guaranty was based on an invalid residency agreement. Trial court also held the resident was not liable to the nursing facility; however, the nursing facility did not appeal the trial court's judgment in favor of the resident or otherwise argue on appeal how the debt survived judgment to trigger the granddaughter's obligation as guarantor. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1011