|
|
Justice v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.
| 26AP-619 | MOTION TO DISMISS — CIV.R. 12 — JURISDICTION — COURT OF CLAIMS: The Court of Claims of Ohio did not err in dismissing under Civ.R. 12 inmate’s complaint against the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction seeking an order requiring the department to provide inmates with better access to court dockets. Because the inmate did not bring any claim for monetary damages in conjunction with her request for equitable redress, the Court of Claims does not have jurisdiction to award her the type of relief she requested. Judgment affirmed. | Edelstein | Franklin |
11/12/2026
|
11/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4496 |
|
Franklin Cty. Prosecutor v. Eichenberger
| 26AP-395 | The trial court’s judgment entry granting appellees’ motions to dismiss the counterclaim and third-party claim is not a final, appealable order because it does not resolve the original claim seeking to declare appellant a vexatious litigator and expressly contemplates further action to be taken by the trial court. Because the judgment entry is not a final, appealable order, the trial court’s prior interlocutory order denying appellant’s motion to quash service remains interlocutory and is also not a final, appealable order. Appeal dismissed. | Edelstein | Franklin |
11/12/2026
|
11/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4498 |
|
K.J. v. K.R.
| 25AP-411 | Judgment affirmed. Appellant asserts that he was never served with notice of the domestic violence civil protection order proceeding under R.C. 3113.31 and was therefore deprived of the opportunity to respond or defend. However, a rebuttable presumption of service arose from the docket entry memorializing the sheriff’s successful attempt to personally serve appellant in accordance with Civ.R. 41(B). Appellant’s bare assertion that service failed and that the record demonstrates such failure, with no citation to any portion of the record to support this claim, is insufficient to rebut the presumption of proper service. | Mentel | Franklin |
11/12/2026
|
11/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4497 |
|
State v. McKinney
| 26AP-223 | Appellant filed a motion with the trial court regarding his sentence. The trial court denied that motion on multiple grounds, including res judicata. Appellant then filed a motion requesting the trial reconsider its judgment. The trial court denied the motion to reconsider, and noted that the prior entry was a final judgment. Appellant appealed the denial of his motion to reconsider. Because there is no rule permitting a trial court to reconsider a final judgment, the entry on which this appeal is based is a legal nullity. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed | Leland | Franklin |
11/10/2026
|
11/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4463 |
|
U.S. Bank Trust Natl. Assn. v. Diallo
| 26AP-474 | The trial court erred in finding appellant's engagement with the case after the court entered judgment operated as a waiver of the defense of insufficient service of process and failing to consider the merits of appellant's motion to vacate. Judgment reversed. | Edelstein | Franklin |
11/10/2026
|
11/10/2026
| 2026-Ohio-4464 |
|