|
|
In re J.F.
| L-26-00044; L-26-00056 | In a permanent custody proceeding, the juvenile court’s denial of incarcerated father’s requests to participate via videoconference or be conveyed was not an abuse of discretion and he was not denied due process. | Sulek | Lucas |
7/31/2026
|
7/31/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2963 |
|
State v. Hagaman
| L-25-00272 | Per Mayle, J., trial court had personal jurisdiction over appellant, who submitted to court’s jurisdiction without objection. Appellant’s speedy-trial rights were not violated. There was no evidence of imminent threat of bodily harm, so trial court’s self-defense finding was supported by the weight of the evidence. Trial court did not have to recite Crim.R. 32(A)(1) verbatim, and appellant was not prejudiced by court’s failure to comply with Crim.R. 32(A)(2) and (3). Counsel was not ineffective. | Mayle | Lucas |
7/28/2026
|
7/28/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2888 |
|
In re R.D.
| L-26-00073, L-26-00074 | No juvenile court error terminating appellant-mother’s parental rights and granting permanent custody of R.D. and A.P. to appellee. Judgments affirmed. Osowik | Osowik | Lucas |
7/22/2026
|
7/23/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2839 |
|
State v. Fench
| L-25-00140 | Zmuda. Defendant waived his rights to a speedy trial upon entering his guilty plea. | Zmuda | Lucas |
7/21/2026
|
7/21/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2794 |
|
WBL SPO I, L.L.C. v. Farraj
| S-25-034 | Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for leave to file amended complaint where appellant acted with undue delay. Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment dismissing appellant’s complaint in foreclosure and on appellees’ counterclaim for declaration that mortgage against property was invalid because appellee presented uncontroverted evidence that party who executed mortgage documents did not have authority to bind property owner. | Sulek | Sandusky |
7/21/2026
|
7/21/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2800 |
|