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
2020-1057 Cletus Snay, et al. v. Matthew Burr, et al. OPEN 10/27/2020 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 1: Although a landowner may generally owe no duty to errant motorists who strike an off-road hazard, an exception exists giving rise to a duty where the landowner consciously creates a hazardous condition in the right-of-way, in close proximity to the traveled portion of the roadway, with actual knowledge of the danger it presents to motorists who unintentionally, but foreseeably, veer off the traveled portion of the roadway
2020-1057 Cletus Snay, et al. v. Matthew Burr, et al. OPEN 10/27/2020 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 2: The open and obvious doctrine does not apply to obviate a landowner’s duty not to consciously place a hazardous item in the right-of-way in close proximity to the traveled portion of the roadway
2020-1057 Cletus Snay, et al. v. Matthew Burr, et al. OPEN 10/27/2020 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 3: An accident reconstructionist’s opinion that plaintiff’s vehicle would not have overturned upon leaving the traveled portion of the roadway “but for” its encounter with a dangerous, unyielding mailbox post is admissible on the issue of proximate cause and is sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact on that issue
2020-1055 State of Ohio v. Markale Lundy OPEN 10/27/2020 Proposition of Law No. I: The reasonableness requirement forces counsel to violate ethical obligations by offering privileged explanations or curtailing due diligence to meet an arbitrary extratextual deadline.
2020-1055 State of Ohio v. Markale Lundy OPEN 10/27/2020 Proposition of Law No. II: Where the paper filings provide prima facie evidence that a defendant has satisfied Criminal Rule 33, a trial court must hold a hearing on whether the motion for leave was filed within the judicially-constructed “reasonable” time before denying leave
2020-0991 State of Ohio v. Marshall Williams OPEN 10/27/2020 Proposition of Law: A trial court has a duty to inquire into the possible conflict of interest created by an attorney’s dual or multiple representation of codefendants in a criminal case.
2020-0957 State ex rel. Peregrine Health Services of Columbus, LLC dba Summit's Trace Healthcare Center, et. al., v. Barbara Sears, Director, Ohio Department of Medicaid OPEN 10/27/2020 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 1: Deference to an agency’s interpretation is not unfettered, and an agency’s interpretation cannot be arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law; nor can the interpretation and application constitute an abuse of discretion. Therefore, a trial court’s deference to the agency is not in keeping with the role of the judiciary to review the agency’s decision when it fails to apply the correct legal standard of review and the correct law of statutory construction in review of the agency’s decision - which is to ascertain and give effect to the legislature’s intent in enacting the statute, including plain meaning
2020-0957 State ex rel. Peregrine Health Services of Columbus, LLC dba Summit's Trace Healthcare Center, et. al., v. Barbara Sears, Director, Ohio Department of Medicaid OPEN 10/27/2020 PROPOSITION OF LAW NO. 2: An agency’s statutory interpretation of a statute that leads to unreasonable results, has consequences that are contrary to the legislature’s stated purposes, and is inconsistent with and frustrates the legislature’s intent should not be given deference.
2020-0931 Lamar Advantage GP Company, LLC, d.b.a. Lamar Advertising of Cincinnati, OH and Norton Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati, Ohio and Nicole Lee, Treasurer of the City of Cincinnati, Ohio and Art Dahlberg, Director of the Department of Buildings and Inspections for the City of Cincinnati, Ohio and Reginald Zeno, Finance Director for the City of Cincinnati, Ohio OPEN 10/13/2020 Proposition of Law No. I: Constitutionally mandated heightened First Amendment scrutiny applies to a discriminatory excise tax on billboards that targets a small group of speakers or singles out the press. Proposition of Law No. II: § 313-7(b), the Tax’s Gag Provision, prohibits political speech.
2020-0866 State of Ohio v. Kelly A. Foreman OPEN 9/29/2020 Proposition of Law: Because a conviction for drug possession requires the state to prove that an offender “ha[d] control over a thing or substance,” the mere presence of drug metabolites in a defendant’s body, without more, does not suffice to establish venue in the charging county.
12345678910...
Case Issue Votes
lbCaseNumber

lbCaseCaptionShort

lbCaseIssueDescription