 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Blackburn v. Coon Restoration & Sealants, Inc., Case No. 2006-CA-0037,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, RICHLAND COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a protective order under Civ. R. 26(C)(7), R.C. §§ 1333.61(D), and 1333.65 regarding a cleaning solvent manufacturer's disclosure of the ingredients of the solvent for purposes of an action involving an alleged inadequate warning as well as medical treatment for injuries caused thereby.
|
|||||
| Carl Ralston Ins. Agency v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., C. A. No. 23336,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, NINTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, SUMMIT COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A contract clause terminating an insurer's duty to compensate an agent who competed with the insurer was an enforceable condition subsequent, not a liquidated damages clause, because liquidated damages applied to contract breaches but the agent did not breach a contract which did not bar his conduct but discharged the insurer's compensation duty.
|
|||||
| Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Rothermel, No. 2006-1639,
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a lawyer solicited a loan from a client, which he only partially repaid, did not tell the client he had been suspended, and represented other clients after he was suspended, he violated Ohio Code Prof. Resp. DR 1-102(A)(4), 5-104(A), Ohio Sup. Ct. R. Gov't Bar V(6)(A)(1), and Ohio Code Prof. Resp. DR 3-101(B), and he was permanently disbarred.
|
|||||
| Guziak v. Guziak, C.A. No. 23264,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, NINTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, SUMMIT COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a wife was granted an accounting regarding a husband's payment of pension benefits to her, and a further review was scheduled, the order was not final and appealable, under R.C. § 2505.02(B)(1) because the parties could not determine their rights and obligations from it, despite Civ. R. 54(B) language that the order was final and appealable.
|
|||||
| In re Crigger, Case No. 2006CA00058,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FAIRFIELD COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court had clear and convincing evidence before it to grant the agency permanent custody of the child, under R.C. § 2151.414. The father had a lengthy history of incarceration; repeatedly failed to visit, communicate, and provide for his son; and did not understand the child's daily physical and medical needs.
|
|||||
| In re K., C.A. Nos. 23338, 23339,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, NINTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, SUMMIT COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A grandmother had no standing, under R.C. § 2109.33, to object to accounts in her grandchildren's guardianship because, while she was a beneficiary of a trust of which the grandchildren were beneficiaries, she was not the guardianship's beneficiary, nor was the trust funded by the guardianship, so she had no pecuniary interest in the guardianship.
|
|||||
| In re Washington, Case No. 06-CA-13,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, KNOX COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence that father had been violent with police, that loaded handgun was found under recliner in father's home five feet from where his child was sitting on couch, and that the father heard voices threatening him with harm overwhelmingly supported decision to grant temporary custody of father's children to grandmother under R.C. § 2151.353(A)(2).
|
|||||
| In re Washington, Case No. 06-CA-12,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, KNOX COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A father's dispositional hearing testimony supported a trial court's order, under R.C. § 2151.353(A)(2), placing his children with their maternal grandmother, upon finding it was not in the children's best interests to place them with their mother, due to a lack of adequate housing, or to place them with their father, due to his mental instability.
|
|||||
| Medallion Northeast Ohio, Inc. v. SCO Medallion Healthy Homes, Ltd., C. A. No. 23368,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, NINTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, SUMMIT COUNTY, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a franchisee and its principals sued a franchisor for, inter alia, fraud, summary judgment was properly granted to the franchisor's principals because the franchisee's complaint never alleged that the franchisor's principals were personally responsible for the fraud alleged, and Civ. R. 9(B) required that fraud claims be pled with specificity.
|
|||||
| Morrow County Airport Auth. v. Whetstone Flyers, Ltd., No. 2005-1802,
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a company's contract with an airport authority violated R.C. §§ 308.04 and 2921.42 because the company's partner was president of the authority board, the contract was not void because R.C. §§ 308.04 and 2921.42 did not so provide, county commissioners ratified the contract without the partner's participation, and both parties had performed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
