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

Issues Accepted for Review

About |  Help
Download PDFadobe icon

  All open cases and cases closed in past 180 days.
Case No.Case CaptionCase StatusDate
Accepted
Case Issue
2018-0792 Aaron Anderson et al. v. WBNS-TV, Inc. OPEN 8/15/2018 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 1: First Amendment protections and jurisprudence extend to speech published on the Internet, and, specifically, this Court’s decision in Lansdowne v. Beacon Journal Publ’g Co., which set the fault standard in private-figure defamation cases, applies equally to statements published on the Internet.
2018-0792 Aaron Anderson et al. v. WBNS-TV, Inc. OPEN 8/15/2018 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 2: The Tenth District’s “stronger duty” requirement is unlawfully vague – it sets a “standard” that is untethered to principles of First Amendment jurisprudence
2018-0792 Aaron Anderson et al. v. WBNS-TV, Inc. OPEN 8/15/2018 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 3: The law does not require the news media to conduct their own investigation or withhold publishing the news until they are able to contact the persons implicated or otherwise inquire into and corroborate official information supplied by law enforcement.
2018-0792 Aaron Anderson et al. v. WBNS-TV, Inc. OPEN 8/15/2018 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 4: Persons are not liable under the law of defamation for statements that they do not publish or authorize another to publish.
2018-0792 Aaron Anderson et al. v. WBNS-TV, Inc. OPEN 8/15/2018 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 5: In determining whether a statement is defamatory, a court must review the totality of the circumstances and by reading the statement in the context of the entire publication to determine whether a reasonable reader would interpret it as defamatory.
2018-0792 Aaron Anderson et al. v. WBNS-TV, Inc. OPEN 8/15/2018 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 6: The essential elements of a defamation claim do not turn on the relative financial condition of the plaintiff and defendant.
2018-0743 State of Ohio v. Michael C. Horn OPEN 8/1/2018 Second Proposition of Law: A familial relationship is not a “mental or physical condition” for purposes of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(c) even if the relationship may be relevant to proving a charge under R.C. 2907.02(A)(2), which is a distinct statutory provision
2018-0711 Gloria Wesolowski v. Planning Commission, City of Broadview Heights, et al. OPEN 8/1/2018 Proposition of Law No. 1: The adoption of local subdivision regulations by a home rule municipal corporation is an exercise of the power of local selfgovernment and, thus, prevail over state law, specifically the procedures set forth in R.C. 711.09(C)
2018-0711 Gloria Wesolowski v. Planning Commission, City of Broadview Heights, et al. OPEN 8/1/2018 Proposition of Law No. 2: Giving R.C. 711.09(C) its plain and ordinary meaning, the subdivision procedures set forth therein do not apply to a city planning commission
2018-0705 State of Ohio v. Zachary C. Allen OPEN 8/1/2018 A BANK WHICH CASHES A FORGED ECONOMIC CHECK, SUFFERS AN LOSS, AND IS A "VICTIM," UNDER R.C. 2929.18. WHEN A DEFENDANT IS CONVICTED OF FORGERY, HE MAY BE ORDERED TO PAY RESTITUTION TO A BANK WHICH CASHED THE FORGED CHECK DEFENDANT PRESENTED.
12345678910...
Case Issue Votes
lbCaseNumber

lbCaseCaptionShort

lbCaseIssueDescription