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 816 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Mohamed 102398 & 103602Consecutive sentences; sentencing recommendation; plea offer. Trial court had no obligation to sentence a defendant consistent with the terms of a plea bargain that had been rejected by defendant. The court likewise had no obligation to sentence the defendant consistent with a sentencing recommendation discussed by the parties post-trial because state's comment that the victim was okay with the recommendation was belied by her letter to the court asking the court to impose the maximum sentence.StewartCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9012
State v. Roberts 104474Res judicata; scope of remand; consecutive sentences; findings; supported by the record; R.C. 2953.08(G); R.C. 2929.14(C)(4). Defendant cannot challenge aspects of the sentence not affected by the original appeal and can only challenge the imposition of consecutive sentences. The trial court did not err in imposing consecutive sentences in this case because it cannot be clearly and convincingly found that the record does not support the findings, which were undisputedly made.GallagherCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9014
Young v. Kaufman 104990 & 105359Will and trust contest claim; removal claim; summary judgment; genuine issues of material fact; presumption of undue influence; confidential relationship; standing. Trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of co-executors and co-trustees on will and trust contest claim. Based on son's role as intermediary and spokesperson for his mother with respect to her estate plan, reasonable minds could disagree as to whether son had a confidential relationship with mother that would entitle appellants to a presumption of undue influence. Genuine issues of fact exist as to whether son's relationship with mother was free of undue influence and whether mother acted voluntarily, with full knowledge and understanding of her actions and their consequences, in executing her estate plan. Given ruling on contest claim, genuine issues of material fact also exist as to whether appellants have standing to assert removal claim.GallagherCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9015
Cleveland v. Borden 105339Assault, aggravated menacing, manifest weight. Appellant's convictions for assault and aggravated menacing were not against the manifest weight of the evidence when she pushed a man over a couch and threatened to shoot two people.GallagherCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9016
Cuyahoga Metro. Hous. Auth. 105384Motion for relief from judgment; Civ.R. 60(B); reasonable time; res judicata. Trial court properly denied defendant's eighth motion for relief from judgment as untimely and barred by res judicata.GallagherCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9017
State v. Truhlar 105385law of the case, res judicata Trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to dismiss based on double jeopardy grounds because the issue was decided in a prior appeal. According the law of the case controls and res judicata bars defendant's appeal.KeoughCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9018
Minaya v. NVR, Inc. 105445Fraudulent concealment; statute of repose; third parties; political subdivision immunity. Plaintiffs cannot defeat the statute of repose by asserting a claim of fraudulent concealment when alleged fraud was perpetrated on a third party. Claim for city's violation of housing inspection ordinances failed because the ordinances were enacted to provide the general welfare and did not establish a private right of action. City was also immune because housing inspections are a governmental function.StewartCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9019
State v. Jones 105527R.C. 2907.03(A)(5); sexual battery; incest; unlawful sexual conduct with minor; consecutive sentences; R.C. 2953.08(G); R.C. 2929.14(C)(4). The R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(b) finding, that the harm is so great and unusual that a single prison term does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offender's conduct, was supported by the record that demonstrated the defendant engaged in a lengthy incestuous relationship with a child under the age of 16 resulting in the birth of two children.GallagherCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9020
In re D.D. 105582Juvenile court; sua sponte dismissal; jurisdiction; complaint. The juvenile court erred in its sua sponte dismissal of the complaint with prejudice pursuant to Juv.R. 29(F)(1) for lack of jurisdiction because the complaint clearly satisfied the requirements of Juv.R. 10. Further, the state had the right to appeal pursuant to R.C. 2945.67(A).McCormackCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9021
Shaker Hts. v. El-Bey 105701 & 105702Sovereign citizen; accelerated appeal; summary disposition. Defendant does not challenge the underlying convictions other than to claim that as a sovereign citizen the local ordinances cannot be applied, an argument rejected by this and several other courts.GallagherCuyahoga 12/14/2017 12/14/2017 2017-Ohio-9022