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
2018-1177 State of Ohio v. Justin Hawkins OPEN 9/12/2018 “Does the discrepancy between the paint color of a vehicle and the paint color listed in vehicle registration records accessed by a police officer provide the officer with reasonable articulable suspicion to perform a lawful investigative traffic stop where the officer believes the vehicle or its displayed license plates may be stolen?”
2018-0883 Barbara Rieger v. Giant Eagle, Inc. OPEN 9/12/2018 Proposition of Law No. 2: The Eighth District has created a new standard for malice that makes the mere possibility of harm from the underlying tortious conduct – no matter how improbable – sufficient for an award of punitive damages.
2018-0852 David Ayers v. City of Cleveland, et al. OPEN 8/29/2018 Proposition of Law No. I: Subsection 2744.07(A)(2) reflects the legislature’s intent to permit a judgment creditor to proceed directly against an indemnitor
2018-0797 State of Ohio v. Darren Taylor OPEN
(Held)
8/29/2018 A trial court need not consider an inmate's present or future ability to pay court costs, or determine whether any exemption statutes prohibit collection from an inmate's account, when ruling on a post-conviction motion to vacate, stay, or remit court costs.
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.
12345678910...
Case Issue Votes
lbCaseNumber

lbCaseCaptionShort

lbCaseIssueDescription