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 45 rows. Rows per page: 
12345
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
In re D.M. 3-18-06Trial court erred by not appointing independent counsel for the 11 year old minor when the GAL filed the motion for permanent custody and the child's repeated wishes were to be reunited with his mother. The GAL could not prosecute the case and represent the wishes of the child as they conflicted. Thus, the child was entitled to independent counsel.WillamowskiCrawford 4/22/2019 4/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1497
Fogt v. Fogt 4-18-10The trial court did not err by entertaining defendant-appellee’s objections to the magistrate’s decision despite defendant-appellee’s failure to provide the trial court with transcripts of the hearings conducted by the magistrate. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by sustaining defendant-appellee’s objections to the magistrate’s decision and modifying the magistrate’s decision.Preston, J.Defiance 4/15/2019 4/15/2019 2019-Ohio-1403
Whalen v. T.J. Automation, Inc. 7-18-27The trial court did not err by granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying plaintiffs-appellants' Civ.R. 56(F) motions.PrestonHenry 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1279
State v. Luebrecht 1-18-56Trial court's denial of suppression motion affirmed where driver crossed over the line into turn lane.ShawAllen 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1277
Pelger v. Pelger 8-18-36When a trial court calculates annual gross income on the child support computation worksheet, the trial court should deduct any spousal support obligation from the obligor's annual gross income and add the value of the spousal support award to the gross annual income of the obligee.WillamowskiLogan 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1280
State v. Lawrence 8-18-50The trial court did not err in sentencing defendant-appellant because there is not clear and convincing evidence that defendant-appellant's sentence is unsupported by the record or otherwise contrary to law.PrestonLogan 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1281
State v. Beverly 8-18-53The trial court did not err in sentencing defendant-appellant because there is not clear and convincing evidence that defendant-appellant's sentences are unsupported by the record or otherwise contrary to law.PrestonLogan 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1282
State v. Osting 4-18-09The trial court did not err in sentencing defendant-appellant because there is not clear and convincing evidence that defendant-appellant's sentence is unsupported by the record or otherwise contrary to law. The trial court did not err by not making findings under R.C. 2951.03(B)(5) where the statement at issue was not referenced in the PSI. The trial court did not err in sentencing defendant-appellant using the information provided in the PSI.PrestonDefiance 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1278
State v. Cartlidge 13-18-33The State did not breach its plea agreement with the defendant-appellant. The trial court did not err in sentencing the defendant-appellant and by not merging allied offenses. The defendant-appellant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel.ZimmermanSeneca 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1283
State v. Magallanes 13-18-34The trial court did not err in sentencing defendant-appellant because there is not clear and convincing evidence that defendant-appellant's sentence is unsupported by the record or otherwise contrary to law.PrestonSeneca 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 2019-Ohio-1284
12345