|
| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
State v. Andrews
| CA2023-07-012 | Appellant's conviction for two counts of violating a protection order was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the evidence provided by the victim, appellant's ex-wife and legal custodian of their two children, and the victim's father, if believed, established that appellant contacted the victim and the victim's father via telephone or text message in violation of a protection order that the victim had obtained against appellant following their divorce. | S. Powell | Fayette |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1730 |
|
Simpson v. Moreland
| CA2023-10-116 | Trial court did not err in dismissing a plaintiff's pro se complaint under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) but erred in dismissing it with prejudice. | M. Powell | Butler |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1728 |
|
Baldwin v. Church of God of Trenton
| CA2023-01-004 | If tortious supervision of a child engaged in a recreational activity that involves inherent risks is alleged, the plaintiff must show that the defendant intentionally or recklessly failed to provide appropriate supervision. Swimming is a recreational activity that involves the inherent risk of drowning. A child who voluntarily participates in this activity assumes the risk of drowning. A supervisor of a child who is swimming in a pool has no duty to decrease the inherent risk of drowning; the supervisor has only to avoid intentionally or recklessly increasing the risk. A supervisor of a child who is swimming in a pool does not consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a child will drown by not acting to decrease the inherent risk of drowning, where the supervisor did not know or have reason to know that there was an unreasonable risk of a serious danger that had a strong probability of causing harm. WITH Dissenting Opinion. | Byrne | Butler |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1726 |
|
Hogg v. Grace Community Church
| CA2023-02-002 & CA2023-03-004 | A court may compel arbitration of disputes that are covered by a binding arbitration agreement. A statute of limitations does not automatically prevent arbitration of a claim if the arbitration agreement does not make arbitration contingent on compliance with the statute of limitations, and if the relevant arbitration rules authorize the arbitrator to determine its own jurisdiction. A party cannot be compelled to arbitrate a dispute unless the party has agreed in writing to do so, or if an exception applies that binds the nonsignatory party to an arbitration agreement. The agency exception that can bind a nonsignatory to an arbitration agreement does not apply if there is no principal-agent relationship between the signatory and the nonsignatory. The estoppel exception does not apply if the nonsignatory has not directly benefited from the agreement containing the arbitration provision. A court may conclude that a party has not waived its right to arbitration if, based on the relevant factors and the procedural context, the party has not acted inconsistently with that right. | Piper | Fayette |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1729 |
|
In re B.G.
| CA2024-01-001 | Juvenile court's decision to grant permanent custody of child to the children services agency was in the best interest of the child and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where Mother failed to complete any of the objectives mandated in her case plan, except for one parenting class. | Hendrickson | Preble |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1731 |
|
In re J.N.
| CA2023-09-105 | The juvenile court's decision adjudicating appellant a delinquent child for committing acts that would be charged as three counts of first-degree felony rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b) and one count of third-degree felony gross sexual imposition in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(4) if committed by an adult was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the alleged victim provided testimony that, if believed, established each of the necessary elements for each of the four charged offenses beyond a reasonable doubt. | S. Powell | Butler |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1727 |
|
In re B.O.
| CA2023-11-102; CA2023-11-104; CA2023-11-105; CA2023-11-106; CA2023-11-107 | The juvenile court did not err by granting permanent custody of appellants' four children to appellee, a local county's children services agency, where the juvenile court's decision complied with the necessary statutory requirements for granting permanent custody and was in the children's best interest. | M. Powell | Warren |
5/6/2024
|
5/6/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1732 |
|
In re X.S.R.S.
| CA2023-12-128 | The juvenile court did not err in granting permanent custody of the children to the children services agency where the children had been in the temporary custody of the agency for more than 12 months of a consecutive 22-month period and the grant of permanent custody to the agency was in the children's best interest. The overwhelming weight of the evidence was that Mother had failed continuously and repeatedly to remedy the conditions that caused the children to be removed from the home. | Piper | Butler |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1636 |
|
State v. Bowling
| CA2023-10-078 | Appellant appeals convictions. Appellant failed to comply with App.R. 12(A)(2) and 16(A)(7) by failing to present any argument and to support any argument with citations to the record. Court of appeals disregarded the sole assignment of error presented and dismissed the appeal. | Byrne | Warren |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1638 |
|
Steve Robertson Trucking, L.L.C. v. Todd
| CA2023-03-031 | Trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment. The record shows that appellant was well aware of his claimed injury and that he was unrepresented. Appellant simply failed to present operative facts to suggest a medical condition prevented him from obtaining counsel, defending the action himself, or providing the trial court with updates to his condition. He offered only general, vague, and conclusory statements about his "brain injury." | Piper | Butler |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1634 |
|
Murray v. Dunn
| CA2023-10-084 | Trial court erred in awarding summary judgment to a landlord where a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the amount of past due rent. Trial court erred in awarding attorney fees to a landlord without determining the reasonableness of the attorney fees. | M. Powell | Warren |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1639 |
|
State v. Rogers
| CA2023-08-063 | Appellant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel based upon his counsel's failure to challenge an alleged biased juror for cause pursuant to R.C. 2313.17(B)(9), and the prosecutor did not engage in misconduct by making improper comments throughout appellant's trial, where appellant was tried and ultimately convicted of one count of first-degree felony rape and five counts of third-degree felony gross sexual imposition of a child and close family member who, at all times relevant, was under the age of ten years old. | S. Powell | Warren |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1637 |
|
State v. Spires
| CA2023-07-011 | Defendant convicted of multiple counts of felonious assault appeals the imposition of consecutive sentences. Defendant failed to demonstrate that the trial court's consecutive sentence findings were clearly and convincingly not supported by the record. | Byrne | Brown |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1633 |
|
State v. Metz
| CA2023-09-109 | Applying the felony sentencing standard set forth under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a), the trial court's decision to impose consecutive sentences upon appellant following appellant's guilty pleas to three counts of third-degree felony gross sexual imposition in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(4) was affirmed where the trial court's consecutive sentence findings made pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) were not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. | S. Powell | Butler |
4/29/2024
|
4/29/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1635 |
|
Kronk v. Getts
| CA2023-09-014 | The trial court did not err by granting appellee a civil stalking protection order against appellant pursuant to R.C. 2903.214(C)(1) where the trial court's finding appellant had engaged in a pattern of conduct that either knowingly caused appellee to believe that appellant would cause her physical harm or knowingly caused appellee to suffer mental distress was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence given appellant's repeated harassment of appellee over the preceding two years | S. Powell | Madison |
4/22/2024
|
4/22/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1516 |
|
State v. Morris
| CA2024-01-001 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
4/22/2024
|
4/22/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1520 |
|
Meranda Nixon Estate Wine, L.L.C. v. Cherry Fork Farm Supply Co.
| CA2023-01-002 | The trial court erred in part by granting summary judgment to appellees, a commercial applicator and his employer, on the landowners' claims for damages to their vineyard as a result of herbicide drift from an herbicide application to a neighboring farm. While summary judgment was properly entered in appellees' favor on the landowners' common-law negligence, private nuisance, and negligent hiring, supervision, and training claims, the trial court improperly disregarded some Civ.R. 56 evidence, ignored issues of fact, and weighed conflicting evidence in awarding summary judgment to appellees on the landowners' claims for negligence per se, indirect trespass, and punitive and treble damages. Issues of material fact remained as to whether the appellees violated R.C. 921.24 by spraying herbicides in a manner inconsistent with their labeling requirements, whether the applicator acted recklessly or with actual malice when he elected to finish spraying the neighboring farm after noticing the wind had picked up and the chemicals he was applying had started to drift, and whether substantial damages were sustained to the landowners' grapevines as a result of the chemical application to the neighboring farm. | Hendrickson | Brown |
4/22/2024
|
4/22/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1523 |
|
State v. Powers
| CA2023-09-100 | As part of appellant's jury trial for endangering children and murder, the trial court did not err by admitting into evidence seven photographs taken during the infant victim's autopsy, or by excluding certain evidence at trial in accordance with Evid.R. 612 and 405(B), and appellant's conviction for endangering children in violation of R.C. 2919.22(B)(1) and (E)(1)(d) was supported by sufficient evidence where the overwhelming evidence established that the infant victim suffered serious physical harm while in the sole care and custody of appellant. | S. Powell | Butler |
4/22/2024
|
4/22/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1521 |
|
Snell v. Howell
| CA2023-08-093 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it modified Father's child support order. The magistrate properly found that circumstances had substantially changed where Father failed to exercise all his court-ordered parenting time and failed to pay for daycare as previously agreed, and therefore the previous downward deviation in Father's support payment was no longer in the best interest of the children. | S. Powell | Butler |
4/22/2024
|
4/22/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1522 |
|
In re C.L.W.
| CA2023-07-048 | The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in continuing the parties' shared parenting plan regarding their daughter and in failing to sanction the mother upon finding her in contempt twice for denying the father's parenting time. | M. Powell | Clermont |
4/22/2024
|
4/22/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1519 |
|
In re P.C.
| CA2023-11-075 | Father appealed the juvenile court's decision designating Grandfather as a necessary party. The juvenile court's decision to join Grandfather as a party does not affect a substantial right and since it is equally reviewable now or after the case has been finally adjudicated is not a final appealable order. Appeal dismissed. | S. Powell | Clermont |
4/15/2024
|
4/15/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1411 |
|
State v. Ivory
| CA2024-01-002 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Warren |
4/15/2024
|
4/15/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1400 |
|
State v. Ndubueze
| CA2023-04-046 | Appellant's convictions for rape and gross sexual imposition are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The jury was in the best position to judge the credibility of the witnesses. | Piper | Butler |
4/15/2024
|
4/15/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1414 |
|
Porter v. Porter
| CA2023-07-086 | The domestic relations court did not err by setting the de facto termination date of the marriage as the date when the final divorce hearing took place where Husband did not offer the court any alternative, nor did the domestic relations court err by ordering Husband to pay spousal support to Wife given the parties' respective ages, duration of the parties' marriage, and the disparity in the parties' respective incomes. | S. Powell | Butler |
4/15/2024
|
4/15/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1413 |
|
State v. Harmon
| CA2023-04-007 | Crim.R. 11 requires a trial court to inform a defendant who is on postrelease control and is pleading guilty to a new felony offense of the trial court's authority to revoke the defendant's postrelease control and impose a prison term consecutively to any term of imprisonment it imposes for that new felony offense. State v. Bishop, 156 Ohio St.3d 156, 2018-Ohio-5132, ¶ 21. | Piper | Madison |
4/15/2024
|
4/15/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1407 |
|
State v. Ndubueze
| CA2023-04-045 | Appeal dismissed. Victims' appeal was moot, because the victims filed the appeal after the trial concluded and there were no applicable exceptions to the mootness doctrine. In addition, it is well settled that courts do not issue advisory opinions. | Piper | Butler |
4/15/2024
|
4/15/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1415 |
|
State v. Hubbard
| CA2023-01-014 | Defendant shot at police and struck one of them. Defendant appeals convictions for felonious assault and other crimes. Greater weight of evidence did not demonstrate that defendant acted in self-defense. Defendant created the situation giving rise to the shooting. Defendant failed to establish that counsel performed deficiently by not submitting the "use of force" policies of the responding police agencies. Defendant's aggregate sentence in prison was not cruel and unusual. Defendant's conduct was egregious. | Byrne | Warren |
4/8/2024
|
4/8/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1315 |
|
Baker v. Comley
| CA2023-01-007 | Defendant appeals decision in favor of plaintiff. Plaintiff named two defendants in complaint but judgment was entered against only one defendant. The claim against the second defendant was unresolved and there was no final appealable order. | Byrne | Butler |
4/8/2024
|
4/8/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1312 |
|
Gordon v. Mt. Carmel Farms, L.L.C.
| CA2023-03-012 | The trial court's injunction was not vague where it prohibited the defendant landowner from using its property "in any way inconsistent" with local zoning regulations and identified the types of business that the landowner was prohibited from allowing to operate on the property. Additionally, the plaintiffs had standing under R.C. 519.24 because their property was located near the defendant's property and the businesses on defendant's property caused various nuisances specific to plaintiffs. Finally, the plain language of R.C. 519.24, a special statute, makes injunctions issued under that statute different from injunctions issued under Civ.R. 65 because the statute is explicitly not limited to preserving the status quo. Defendant takes no issue with the court's factual findings, including that the companies operating on its property did so in violation of local zoning ordinances and can thus be removed from the property entirely pursuant to R.C. 519.24. | Hendrickson | Clermont |
4/8/2024
|
4/8/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1313 |
|
State v. Elkins
| CA2023-02-001 | Defendant appeals domestic violence conviction. Conviction was supported by sufficient evidence that defendant had knowledge of causing the victim physical harm. Defendant's argument that 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) was unconstitutional as applied was waived. | Byrne | Preble |
4/8/2024
|
4/8/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1314 |
|
Batsche v. Batsche
| CA2023-08-051 | The trial court properly denied Plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment, directed verdict, and judgement notwithstanding the as to their tortious interference with inheritance claim where the Plaintiffs relied exclusively on the presumption that where a fiduciary relationship exists between a donor and donee, undue influence occurred. Additionally, defendant presented evidence that the donor was of sound mind before his death despite his physical decline. Plaintiffs' assignments of error as to their conversion claim are moot or harmless because jury found in their favor as to their primary claim of civil theft. It was error for the trial court to deny Plaintiffs treble damages as to their civil theft claim because R.C. 2307.61 gives the trial court no discretion to do so if the Plaintiffs properly elected to pursue treble damages, overruling Justice v. Justice, 12th Dist. Butler No. CA2004-03-074, 2005-Ohio-1802. WITH Dissenting Opinion. | S. Powell | Clermont |
4/1/2024
|
4/1/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1234 |
|
State v. Hall
| CA2023-06-047 | The trial court did not err by summarily dismissing appellant's pro se petition for postconviction relief without a hearing where the doctrine of res judicata barred appellant's claims alleging his trial counsel provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel given that appellant failed to provide the necessary "outside-the-record" evidence to avoid dismissal of his pro se postconviction relief petition without the need for the trial court to first hold a hearing on the matter. | Hendrickson | Warren |
4/1/2024
|
4/1/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1235 |
|
State v. Jarrett
| CA2023-09-101 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
4/1/2024
|
4/1/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1232 |
|
Canter v. Kingdomwork, L.L.C.
| CA2023-05-049 | The trial court properly granted defendant summary judgment where the defendant presented evidence that the sign complied with zoning regulations at the time it was constructed and is thus considered legally nonconforming under the Middletown Development Code. In addition, Plaintiff's argument that the sign was not constructed in conformance with the certificate amounts to mere speculation. Nothing in the record remotely speaks to or supports the assertion. | Piper | Butler |
4/1/2024
|
4/1/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1231 |
|
Dickenson v. Jackson
| CA2023-09-073 | The domestic relations court did not err by finding appellant in contempt under R.C. 2705.02(A) for violating her and appellee's shared parenting plan in regard to appellee's parenting time schedule nor did the domestic relations court err by ordering appellant to pay attorney fees and litigation expenses to appellee in accordance with R.C. 3105.73(B) based upon appellant being found in contempt. | S. Powell | Warren |
4/1/2024
|
4/1/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1236 |
|
In re C.J.H.
| CA2023-04-024; CA2023-04-025; CA2023-04-026; CA2023-04-027; CA2023-04-028 | Juvenile court erred by not mandatorily binding over appellees to the general division of the court of common pleas pursuant to R.C. 2152.12(A)(1)(a)(i) where there was probable cause to believe appellees were complicit in committing murder and aggravated murder. Reversed and remanded. | Hendrickson | Clermont |
4/1/2024
|
4/1/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1233 |
|
Bettman v. JDH Bldg. Group, L.L.C.
| CA2023-11-096 | The trial court erred by denying a motion for a preliminary injunction without a hearing where the trial court considered only one factor of the relevant analysis. No single element on consideration of a motion for a preliminary injunction is dispositive. Moreover, the trial court's denial of the preliminary injunctive relief then served as an inappropriate basis for rending the discovery dispute moot. | Piper | Warren |
3/25/2024
|
3/25/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1092 |
|
S.E. v. Edelstein
| CA2023-08-064 | The trial court did not err by granting appellee's pro se Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss where appellants' alleged claims of breach of contract, loss of consortium, and intentional interference with a contract were, in actuality, claims alleging a breach of a promise to marry or alienation of affection, amatory claims that were abolished by R.C. 2305.29. | S. Powell | Warren |
3/25/2024
|
3/25/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1090 |
|
In re A.V.
| CA2023-08-067 | The juvenile court did not err by granting permanent custody of appellants' four children to appellee, a local county's children services agency, where the juvenile court's decision complied with the necessary statutory requirements for granting permanent custody and was in the children's best interest. | S. Powell | Warren |
3/25/2024
|
3/25/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1091 |
|
State v. Redden
| CA2023-09-106 | Trial court erred in convicting defendant of domestic violence because there was insufficient evidence to prove he knowingly caused physical harm to the mother of his child. | M. Powell | Butler |
3/25/2024
|
3/25/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1088 |
|
State v. Johnson
| CA2023-10-112 | Appellant's no contest plea to one count of first-degree misdemeanor receiving stolen property was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered where the trial court properly advised appellant as to the effect of a no contest plea in accordance with Crim.R. 11(E) and the trial court's recitation of the facts satisfied the explanation-of-circumstances requirement set forth by R.C. 2937.07. | S. Powell | Butler |
3/25/2024
|
3/25/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1089 |
|
Mundy v. Centrome, Inc.
| CA2023-06-050 | The trial court erred by imposing sanctions under Civ.R. 37(C) where neither the trial court's findings nor the record evidence shows a violation of the Civ.R. 26(E) duty to supplement discovery responses. | S. Powell | Warren |
3/18/2024
|
3/18/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1001 |
|
State v. Kyles
| CA2023-07-083 | The trial court did not err by denying a petition for postconviction relief filed pursuant to R.C. 2953.21(A)(1)(a)(i) without first holding a hearing where, although the trial court misapplied the doctrine of res judicata, the petition did not provide sufficient evidence to establish substantive grounds for relief that would have required the trial court hold a hearing on appellant's petition. | S. Powell | Butler |
3/18/2024
|
3/18/2024
| 2024-Ohio-998 |
|
Shamrock Restoration, L.L.C. v. Muncy
| CA2023-07-056 | Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to a contractor where pro se property owner did not file a response to the contractor's motion for summary judgment. | M. Powell | Warren |
3/18/2024
|
3/18/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1002 |
|
Wagoner v. Wagoner
| CA2023-06-048, CA2023-11-101 | Mother appeals order denying contempt motion against Father and granting Father's motion to modify the shared parenting plan. Magistrate applied the correct standard in assessing whether a parent should be held in contempt for failing to facilitate the other parent's parenting time. Mother argued that court erred by failing to find a change of circumstance before modifying shared parenting plan. Change-of-circumstance finding only required for modifying the shared parenting decree and specifically with respect to a change in custodial parent. | Byrne | Warren |
3/18/2024
|
3/18/2024
| 2024-Ohio-1000 |
|
State v. Davis
| CA2023-10-070 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Clermont |
3/18/2024
|
3/18/2024
| 2024-Ohio-999 |
|
Baker v. Bunker Hill Haven Home
| CA2023-08-095 | The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to appellee, a group home for wayward boys, where appellant, the administrator of her late son's estate, failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact existed that could subject appellee to liability for negligent supervision under a theory of in loco parentis. | S. Powell | Butler |
3/11/2024
|
3/11/2024
| 2024-Ohio-875 |
|
State v. Agnew
| CA2023-05-054 | Appellant's convictions for assault were not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant did not act in self-defense when he sprayed pepper spray into the victims' faces. Appellant cannot provoke an assault or voluntarily enter an encounter and then claim a right of self-defense. | Piper | Butler |
3/11/2024
|
3/11/2024
| 2024-Ohio-874 |
|
Lazor v. Souders
| CA2023-10-080 | Trial court did not err in issuing a civil stalking protection order against respondent; but trial court erred in imposing a firearm restriction for the duration of the order. | M. Powell | Warren |
3/4/2024
|
3/4/2024
| 2024-Ohio-774 |
|
Total Quality Logistics, L.L.C. v. All Pro Logistics, L.L.C.
| CA2022-11-078; CA2022-12-082 | Trial court erred by sua sponte dismissing the claims with prejudice. The opposing party in this case did not file a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment. In addition, it is unclear whether the trial court dismissed the claims under the Civ.R. 12(B) standard of dismissal or granted summary judgment under the Civ.R. 56 standard. However, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of logistics company where the record shows that it established a Carmack Amendment claim by virtue of an assignment of rights from its customer. | Piper | Clermont |
3/4/2024
|
3/4/2024
| 2024-Ohio-772 |
|