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
2016-1652 State of Ohio v. Juhan Brown OPEN 12/28/2016 Whether the post-release control notification of R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(e) must include notification of the penalty provisions in R.C. 2929.141(A)(1)-(2), specifically, whether a trial court must inform an offender at the time of sentencing that the commission of a felony during a period of post-release control permits a trial court to impose a new prison term for the violation to be served consecutively with any prison term for the new felony."
2016-1395 State of Ohio v. Colton Dye OPEN 11/9/2016 PURSUANT TO R.C. 295352, MUST TRIAL COURTS WAIT UNTIL THE APPLICABLE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS EXPIRED PRIOR TO SEALING THE RECORDS OF A CASE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE?
2016-1297 State of Ohio v. Ahmad Mobarak CLOSED
(Held)
10/26/2016 whether it was an offense to sell or possess controlled substance analogs after the enactment of 201 1 Am.Sub.H.Bl No. 64 but prior to December 26, 2012 when the legislature enacted a bill "to create the offenses of trafficking in and possession of controlled substance analogs." (Emphasis added.) 2012 Am.Sub.I-l.B. No. 334.
2016-1197 In re: D.H. OPEN 1/25/2017 Proposition of Law: A juvenile court order transferring jurisdiction of a child's case to common pleas court is a final, appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4)(a)-(b)
2016-1195 In re: D.H. OPEN 1/25/2017 Proposition of Law: A juvenile court order transferring jurisdiction of a child's case to common pleas court is a final, appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4)(a)-(b)
2016-1168 State of Ohio v. Ahmad Mobarak CLOSED
(Held)
10/26/2016 Proposition of Law: As effective October 17, 2011, R.C. 3719.013 mandated that "controlled substance analogs" shall be treated as Schedule I controlled substances for purposes of any provision in the Revised Code. The trafficking and possession statutes were part of die Revised Code and therefore were subject to this broad incorporation of analogs into the Revised Code.
2016-1138 City of Toledo v. State of Ohio et al. OPEN
(Held)
10/26/2016 Ohio's traffic-camera statutes are general laws that displace conflicting municipal traffic-camera ordinances enacted pursuant to a municipality's police powers
2016-1136 City of Toledo v. State of Ohio et al. OPEN
(Held)
10/26/2016 Whether Am.Sub.S.B. No. 342 is an unconstitutional infringement of Municipalities' right to self-governance under Article XVIII, Section 3, of the Ohio Constitution.
2016-1122 Dr. Tobias R. Reid, Ph.D. v. Cleveland Police Department et al. OPEN 1/25/2017 The law of the case doctrine "provides that the decision of a reviewing court in a case remains the law of that case on the legal questions involved for all subsequent proceedings in the case at both the trial and reviewing levels." (Nolan v Nolan 11 Ohio St.3d 1, 462 N.E.2d 410 (1984) construed). An appellate court decision that addresses assignments of error presented on appeal by a defendant in a criminal case following his or her conviction does not constitute the "law of the case" to be applied in a civil case that is subsequently brought by the convicted criminal defendant against individuals and entities who were not parties to the criminal case which resulted in a conviction. Thus, an appellate court errs and misapplies the law in declaring its earlier opinion in a criminal case to be the "law of the case" in a subsequent civil case
2016-1116 Lightning Rod Mutual Insurance Co. v. Robert Southworth, d.ba. Bob's Home Service, et al. OPEN 1/25/2017 A general liability insurance policy that applies to "property damage' that occurs during the policy period is `triggered' by damage during the policy period regardless of whether that damage is the continutaion or resumption of damage that first appeared before the policy period as long as that damage was not known to the insured or those persons specifically listed in the policy prior to the inception of the policy.
12345678910...
Case Issue Votes
lbCaseNumber

lbCaseCaptionShort

lbCaseIssueDescription