|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case
for free through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more.
lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
|
| |
State Courts -
Ohio - January 5, 2007
|
| |
|
| |
Cantrell v. Ohio State Bd. of Emergency Med. Servs., Case No. 06CA3078,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, SCIOTO COUNTY, January 5, 2007, Date Journalized
View this case - free
|
Overview: An emergency medical technician's (EMT) admitted sexual imposition on an inmate while he was acting as her jailer involved moral turpitude, as defined in Ohio Admin. Code 4765:1-01(R), even if the conduct was consensual, because he acted as a law enforcement officer, and revoking his EMT certificate was an allowed sanction that was not reviewable.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Farley v. Lairmore, C.A. CASE NO. 2005 CA 36,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, CLARK COUNTY, January 5, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free
|
Overview: A trial court's award of custody to a father and a grant of restrictive visitation to a mother was proper pursuant to the "best interest" test of R.C. § 3109.04(f)(1), based on the mother's prescription drug dependency, alcohol abuse, DUI convictions, as well as the father's lack of any dependency and support from his extended family.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
In re B.J., C.A. CASE NO. 21537,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, January 5, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where a magistrate failed to adequately inform a minor of his constitutional right to counsel at a disposition hearing after he was adjudicated delinquent, there was no knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of that right; accordingly, a reversal of the disposition hearing was mandated.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|