06/13/2024
Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Decided | WebCite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northern Frozen Foods, Inc. v. Saadey | 113048 | Civ.R. 60(B); motion to vacate; Civ.R. 58; Civ.R. 5; service; abuse of discretion. While the delay between trial and judgment was extraordinary, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s Civ.R. 60(B) motion to vacate judgment. | Kilbane | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2264 |
| State v. Cawthorne | 112795 | Aggravated murder; plea; firearm specification; Crim.R. 11(C)(2) and (3); maximum fine; harmless error; plea colloquy; prejudice. - Appellant’s mid-trial change of plea upheld. Crim.R. 11(C)(3) only applies to aggravated murder with a death specification. Trial court complied with Crim.R. 11(C)(2) in accepting appellant’s guilty plea to the firearm specification attendant to the aggravated murder offense. Trial court’s incorrect advisement regarding the maximum fine was harmless error because the court found appellant indigent and did not impose a fine. Trial court’s run-on advisement of appellant’s constitutional rights during the plea was not in error because the manner in which the court provided the statement was effective; appellant was not prejudiced. | Keough | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2258 |
| State v. Wilson | 112690 | Double homicide; murder; R.C. 2903.02(A); R.C. 2903.02(B); felonious assault; R.C. 2903.11(A)(1)-(2); bench trial; manifest weight of the evidence, insufficient evidence; complicity theory; circumstantial evidence. Defendant-appellant was convicted at a bench trial of two homicides and various assaults that stem from two separate instances. We find on review that the state presented sufficient evidence in the first instance that the defendant was complicit in the first murder and related felonious assault charges. However, we find the state failed to present sufficient evidence for the second murder and related felonious assaults charges. Appellant’s convictions as to the first murder and related assault charges are sustained. Appellant’s convictions for the second murder and assault charges are vacated. All remaining convictions are affirmed. Case remanded to the trial court for resentencing. | Forbes | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2257 |
| State v. Miklavcic | 113263 | Attempted felonious assault; clearly and convincingly; maximum sentence; abuse of discretion; ability to pay fine. Judgment affirmed. The record clearly and convincingly supports defendant’s 36-month maximum sentence. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing maximum fine because even though the trial court did not specifically inquire into defendant’s present and future ability to pay the fine, the record supports it. | Boyle | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2268 |
| Malaj v. Abeid | 112658 | Motion to vacate judgment; Civ.R. 60(B); default judgment; service by publication; reasonable efforts; concealment to avoid service. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, where service by publication had been authorized and properly effected. The record reasonably supported a conclusion that the defendant left the state and concealed his whereabouts to avoid service and that the plaintiff used reasonable diligence to ascertain his residence before resorting to service by publication. The defendant’s argument based on the statute of limitations was also rejected, since that is an affirmative defense that cannot be raised where a defendant never appears and instead defaults. | E.A. Gallagher | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2256 |
| In re M.I. | 113093 | In-court identification; gun; felony assault; firearm specification; sufficient evidence shooter; reasonable doubt; trial court erred; beyond reasonable doubt; manifest weight; adjudication; delinquency; assignment; weight of the evidence; testify; manifest weight of the evidence; discharge; no pretrial identification procedure; prohibition; premises; burden of production; trier of fact; conviction; circumstantial element of the offense; witness testimony. The trial court erred by admitting unreliable in-court identification of the juvenile defendant when no pretrial identification procedure was at issue. The error was harmless because the remaining evidence supported the delinquency adjudications of felonious assault, one- and three-year firearm specifications, and discharge of a firearm on or near a prohibited place. | Groves | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2266 |
| Cuyahoga Cty. Treasurer v. Henen | 112983 | Material breach; essential terms; substantial performance; land-purchase contract; foreclosure; de novo; manifest weight; abuse of discretion. Trial court properly ordered foreclosure of the premises pursuant to the terms of the land contract, as a result of appellant’s breach. A de novo review of the undisputed facts found that appellant materially breached the land contract. The trial court did not abuse its discretion ordering the foreclosure pursuant to the terms of the contract. The trial court’s finding that appellant failed to prove his breach-of-contract, fraud, and partition claims was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. | Forbes | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2263 |
| Steigerwald v. Berea | 112933 | Summary judgment; genuine issues of material fact. The appellees’ summary judgment motion was improperly granted because there are genuine issues of material fact for trial. | Laster Mays | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2260 |
| Caston v. Woodlands of Shaker Hts. | 113262 | Motion to enforce arbitration; arbitration agreement; valid contract; apparent authority or apparent agency; burden of proof; equitable estoppel; moot; implied authority. The trial court erred when it granted defendants’ motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration where the record did not establish that the nursing home resident cloaked her daughter with authority to execute a binding arbitration agreement. Absent the daughter’s apparent authority to execute the arbitration agreement on behalf of her mother, the resident was not bound by the arbitration agreement. | Kilbane | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2267 |
| State v. Hall | 113423 | Reagan Tokes Law; indefinite sentences; constitutional challenges; due process; separation of powers; right to jury trial. Pursuant to State v. Hacker, 173 Ohio St.3d 219, 2023-Ohio-2535, 229 N.E.3d 38, appellant’s constitutional challenges to the indefinite sentencing provisions of the Reagan Tokes Law are overruled. | E.A. Gallagher | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2270 |
| Goldstein v. Saber Healthcare Group, L.L.C. | 112907 | R.C. Chapter 2711, arbitration, reconsideration, jurisdiction. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to reconsider a final appealable order denying a motion to compel arbitration and stay the proceedings. | Laster Mays | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2259 |
| In re L.H. | 113479 | Permanent custody; termination; parental rights; case plan; reasonable; diligent efforts; findings; manifest weight; visitation; substance abuse. The trial court’s award of permanent custody and termination of appellant’s parental rights is against the manifest weight of the evidence. | E.T. Gallagher | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2271 |
| In re M.F. | 113525 | Permanent custody; R.C. 2151.414; best interest; manifest weight of the evidence; hearsay; plain error. The juvenile court’s decision to grant the agency’s motion for permanent custody was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the court made appropriate findings pursuant to R.C. 2151.414 and those findings were supported by clear and convincing evidence. The admission of testimony from the foster father and agency social worker regarding allegations of abuse against Father from his wife did not amount to plain error. | Kilbane | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2272 |
| Hopkins v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Auth. | 113088 | Political subdivision; immunity; final judgment; journalized entry; abuse of discretion; discovery; jurisdiction; due process; deadline; affirmative defense. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it refused to consider appellant’s untimely immunity defense. Appellant’s motion for summary judgment, alleging the affirmative defense of political subdivision immunity, was filed without leave of court and provided the nonmoving party insufficient time to respond. The trial court has inherent authority to manage its docket, absent an abuse of discretion. Appellant did not request a continuance of the trial date and consideration of the motion would have prejudiced appellee. | Groves | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2265 |
| State v. Allie | 112953 | Illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material; R.C. 2907.323; photographs; unknown females; unknown ages; lay witness testimony; Evid.R. 402, 403, 602, and 701; prosecutorial misconduct; closing argument. - Appellant’s convictions for illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, in violation of R.C. 2907.323, upheld where jury viewed the photographs of the unknown females and could determine whether they were minors. Detective’s opinion testimony that was based on his training and experience in analyzing, detecting, and deciphering child pornography was relevant and admissible under Evid.R. 402, 602, and 701. Prosecutor did not engage in misconduct during her rebuttal closing arguments when her comments refuted appellant’s closing argument and were based on the evidence presented. | Keough | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2262 |
| State v. Hughes | 113382 | Res judicata; aggravated murder; guilty plea. Appellant’s attempt to address claimed errors in his initial case that were the subject of a direct appeal and multiple subsequent appeals must be barred by res judicata. With respect to errors in the sentencing entry, the claimed errors were readily apparent and available for challenge during the direct appeal of his convictions. With respect to his challenge to the conviction, appellant raised the issue on direct appeal and his objection was overruled. Appellant’s claims are therefore barred by res judicata and his conviction must be affirmed. | Groves | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2269 |
| State v. Jackson | 112944 | Motion for leave to file motion for new trial; Crim.R. 33; abuse of discretion. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Jackson’s motion for leave to file an untimely motion for new trial without hearing because the motion on its face does not support Jackson’s claim that he was unavoidable prevented from discovering the evidence within the prescribed time. | Boyle | 6/13/2024 | 2024-Ohio-2261 |