 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allstate Ins. Co. v. Cleveland Elec. Illuminating Co., No. 87781,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When an insurer alleged a utility company's failure to respond to a customer's report of tree limbs endangering the company's electric lines caused a fire for which the insurer paid claims, this was a tort claim about the adequacy of utility service over which the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio had exclusive jurisdiction, under R.C. § 4905.26.
|
|||||
| Barr v. Lauer, No. 87514,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A shareholder could not directly sue officers for corporate wrongs, rather than derivatively under Civ. R. 23.1, as nothing showed he was owed a duty above that owed all shareholders, nor were breach of contract or fraud sufficiently pled, but negligent misrepresentation was as the company went bankrupt after he was persuaded not to sell his stock.
|
|||||
| Day-Glo Color Corp. v. Brewer-Garrett Co., No. 87838,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A service company's customer could not recover for the company's alleged failure to perform a repair of the customer's heater in a workmanlike manner because the customer did not show that the repair caused the heater's explosion or otherwise show what caused the explosion, so the company was entitled to a directed verdict, under Civ. R. 50(A)(4).
|
|||||
| J & H Willco Inc. v. Ohio State Liquor Control Comm'n, No. 06AP-885,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was not an abuse of discretion for a trial court to find that reliable, probative, and substantial evidence supported the refusal of the Liquor Control Commission to renew a liquor permit because, under R.C. § 4303.271(D)(2)(a) and (b)(i), the Commission was required to deny renewal of the permit because of the permit holder's tax delinquencies.
|
|||||
| McCord v. McCord, Nos. 06AP-102, 06AP-684,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court's award of attorney fees to the mother was within the parameters of R.C. § 3105.73, and was not an abuse of discretion. The trial court reviewed the entire proceedings and found that the father had caused undue delay and that his conduct required the mother to employ counsel for additional time spent in the matter.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Ohio DOT, Case No. 2005-01447,
COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Casalicchio, No. 87902,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's more than minimum sentence was vacated and case was remanded for resentencing since, in sentencing defendant, trial court relied on statutory provisions that Ohio Supreme Court had declared unconstitutional in State v. Foster. Defendant was entitled to resentencing even though his appeal was not filed until after Foster case was issued.
|
|||||
| State v. Grim, No. 06AP-318,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since defendant had been released from prison after serving his full prison term, the trial court lacked jurisdiction under R.C. § 2967.28 to journalize an amended entry imposing a mandatory period of post-release control four months after defendant had been released from prison.
|
|||||
| State v. Merideth, Case No. 06 CA 15,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, PERRY COUNTY, January 18, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a trial court's initial sentence upon defendant's felony convictions did not include the mandatory term of post-release control pursuant to R.C. §§ 2929.14(F) and 2967.28, the sentence was a nullity and a resentence in order to impose that term did not violate double jeopardy under U.S. Const. amend. V.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
