 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| McGrew v. Popham, Case No. 05 CA 129,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, LICKING COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A decedent's son created a genuine issue of material fact that should have precluded summary judgment to the decedent's grandson in the son's claim that the decedent had gifted her farm to the grandson during her life in a fiduciary capacity and that she intended to give the farm to her son and daughter upon her death.
|
|||||
| Mokrytzky v. Super Sys., No. 87929,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The four-year limitations period applied to suits under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C.S. § 227, began, under R.C. § 1.14, the day after an event complained of occurred and ended on the event's anniversary, so a litigant's complaint filed four years and one day after the event was untimely, and the complaint was properly dismissed.
|
|||||
| Musil v. Musil, No. 87987,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's division of marital assets was not an abuse of discretion, under R.C. § 3105.171, because the court had sufficient evidence before it that a husband's classic cars were not worth their maximum value, because of their condition, and his real property was correctly valued, considering its equity, improvements, and mortgage balance.
|
|||||
| Parma City Sch. v. State, No. 88227,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A decision by the Ohio Unemployment Compensation Review Commission that an employee was entitled to unemployment compensation because she did not leave work voluntarily was unreasonable, unlawful, and against the manifest weight of the evidence under R.C. §§ 4141.282(H) and 4141.29(D)(2)(a), as she had voluntarily resigned.
|
|||||
| People ex rel. Kocak, No. 87926,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's dismissal of a solicitor's mandamus action was proper, as he had no clear legal right to relief because as he was not a taxpayer or resident of a city and showed no beneficial interest, he lacked standing; he also did not show that the city had a clear legal duty, as its employees and officials were not required to post a bond.
|
|||||
| Ruderson v. Wal-Mart Store # 2266, No. 88194,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An invitee's suit against store to recover for injuries she sustained when cases of soda pop fell off conveyor belt and landed on her foot was properly dismissed on summary judgment because open and obvious doctrine applied. Cases were placed on belt by another customer, invitee was closer to customer than cashier, and cashier never handled cases.
|
|||||
| Seaway Acceptance Corp. v. Ligtvoet, No. 87970,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a judgment creditor sought, under R.C. § 2333.01, an order requiring insurers to pay the creditor funds they were obligated to pay the judgment debtor, pursuant to a settlement, the attachment sought was contrary to law because a contract between the insurers, funding the obligation, contained a spendthrift trust provision barring attachment.
|
|||||
| Spires v. Bd. of Bldgs. Stds. & Bldg. Appeals, No. 87760,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A denial by the Ohio Board of Building Standards and Building Appeals of a property owner's third request for an extension of time to make repairs to her home after she was cited for numerous housing code violations was not error as a matter of law, as the owner had failed to remedy any violations after prior extensions were granted.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. AG v. Grand Tobacco, No. 05AP-213,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, February 1, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A foreign tobacco manufacturer's (TM) motion under Civ. R. 12(B) to dismiss an action by the Ohio Attorney General, based on its alleged obligations as a TM under R.C. § 1346.01, was properly denied; assertion of long-arm jurisdiction pursuant to R.C. § 2307.382(A)(1) was proper, as the TM's transacted business and had minimum contacts in Ohio.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
