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 437 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Madden 16AP-259Judgment of conviction affirmed; appellant failed to demonstrate plain error as a result of references to "victim" made during testimony of law enforcement officers.BrownFranklin 12/7/2017 12/8/2017 2017-Ohio-8894
Duff v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. 16AP-851The trial court did not err when it granted OAPA's motion to dismiss.BrownFranklin 12/7/2017 12/8/2017 2017-Ohio-8895
Grieser v. Janis 17AP-3The trial court did not err when it granted appellees' motion for JNOV following a jury verdict in favor of appellants on their medical claim because appellants failed to present the testimony of a medical expert to establish the recognized standard of care in the medical community relative to the total ankle replacement surgery performed by appellee/podiatrist and failed to present the testimony of a medical expert to establish to a probability that the negligent conduct of appellee/podiatrist was, more likely than not, the proximate cause of harm to appellants. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 12/7/2017 12/8/2017 2017-Ohio-8896
State ex rel. Mignella v. Indus. Comm. 16AP-441Writ of procedendo denied.BrownFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8831
State v. Gomez 16AP-560Trial court complied with requirements of Crim.R. 11 in accepting appellant's guilty plea.BrownFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8832
Myers v. Wade 16AP-667Modifying a shared parenting plan requires analysis of some different factors under R.C. 3901.04 than modifying a shared parenting decree or order. The standard is best interest of the child in modifying the allocation of parental rights. The Rules for Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio does not supply a legal basis to challenge the actions or testimony of a domestic relations court-appointed guardian ad litem for the purpose of challenging a trial court's fact finding in adjudicating a motion for reallocation of parental rights under a shared parenting plan. No abuse of discretion is found, nor is the trial court's decision against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.BrunnerFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8833
State v. Pablo 16AP-888Juvenile criminal defendants hold Miranda rights and waiver of them must be knowing and voluntary. A police department interviewing a juvenile should make a serious effort to ensure that the juvenile's parents are present for an interrogation, as it is a factor to be considered in determining a motion to suppress a juvenile's statements made while in custody and having waived his or her Miranda rights under a totality of the circumstances analysis, which occurs on a case-by-case basis. In this case there was evidence that the juvenile's intelligence level was not high, that English was not his first or primary language, and that he had no prior experience with the police. In such circumstances when no parent has been present to assist the juvenile in understanding his rights and what wavier of them means under Miranda, it was not error for the trial court to have found that the juvenile's Miranda rights waiver was invalid and any ensuing confession requiring suppression.BrunnerFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8834
Ettayem v. Land of Ararat Invest. Group, Inc. 17AP-93Trial court correctly ruled that plaintiff could not maintain action on behalf of his wholly owned corporation, but erred in granting summary judgment on breach of fiduciary duty claim because genuine issues of material fact remained.DorrianFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8835
Smith v. Ohio State Univ. 17AP-218The Court of Claims of Ohio did not err in dismissing appellants' Fair Credit Reporting Act claims against The Ohio State University for lack of standing. Judgment affirmed.Luper SchusterFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8836
State v. Rexrode 17AP-224Pursuant to Crim.R. 32(C), State v. Lester, 130 Ohio St.3d 303, 2011-Ohio-5204,  11, and the "one document" rule of State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-Ohio-3330,  17, the trial court's sentencing entry did not constitute a final, appealable order where it failed to set forth the finding of guilt or fact of conviction. Appeal dismissed.SadlerFranklin 12/5/2017 12/5/2017 2017-Ohio-8837