Ohio Law

News and Announcements from the Supreme Court of Ohio and Other Governmental Entities Within the Buckeye State.

Monday, February 27, 2006

2/27/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Decisions and Administrative Actions

MERIT DECISIONS WITH OPINIONS

2004-1171 and 2004-1267. State v. Mathis, 2006-Ohio-855.
Cuyahoga App. No. 83311, 2004-Ohio-2982, and Cuyahoga App.
No. 82278, 2004-Ohio-2971. Judgments affirmed and causes
remanded to the trial court.
Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and
Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Resnick, J., concurs in paragraph three of the syllabus and in judgment.

2004-1568, 2004-1771, 2005-0735, and 2005-2156. State v. Foster,
2006-Ohio-856. Licking App. No. 03CA95, 2004-Ohio-4209,
Cuyahoga App. No. 83720, 2004- Ohio-4485, Lake App. No.
2003-L-110, 2005-Ohio-1107, and Ottawa App. No. OT-03-016,
2005-Ohio-5257. Judgment reversed in No. 2004-1568 and cause
remanded to the trial court. Judgment affirmed in No. 2004-1771
and cause remanded to the trial court. Judgment reversed in
No. 2005-0735 and cause remanded to the trial court. Judgment
affirmed in No. 2005-2156. Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton,
O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Resnick, J., concurs in paragraph seven of the syllabus and in judgment.

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2003-1572. State ex rel. Howard v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 97AP-860. This cause came on for further
consideration of appellant's motion for leave to file a motion for relief
from this court's prior judgments and motion for leave to file a motion
for sanctions. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motions are denied.

2005-1432. In re Guardianship of Schneider.
Medina App. No. 05CA0050-M. This cause came on for further
consideration of appellant's motions to vacate entries issued by the court
on January 25 and February 13, 2006, and motions for leave to hear all
matters in this case en banc. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motions are denied.

2005-1652. In re Guardianship of Schneider.
Medina App. No. 05CA0050-M. This cause came on for further
consideration of appellant's motions to vacate entries issued by this
court on February 8 and February 13, 2006, and motions for leave
to hear all matters in this case en banc. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motions are denied.

2005-2034. State v. Weber.
Hamilton App. No. C-040820, 2005-Ohio-4854. This cause is pending
before the court as a discretionary appeal and claimed appeal of right.
On October 31, 2005, appellant filed a notice that a motion to certify a
conflict was pending in the court of appeals and, pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. IV(4)(A), this court stayed consideration of the jurisdictional
memoranda filed in this appeal. Whereas appellant has neither notified
this court that the court of appeals determined that a conflict does not
exist as provided by S.Ct.Prac.R. IV(4)(B) nor filed a copy of the court
of appeals' order certifying the existence of a conflict as provided by
S.Ct.Prac.R. IV(4)(C), IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that
appellant show cause within 14 days from the date of this entry why
this court should not proceed to consider the jurisdictional memoranda
in this appeal pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. III(6).

2005-2106. State v. Sullivan-Griggs.
Hamilton App. No. C-040853. This cause is pending before the court
as a discretionary appeal and claimed appeal of right. On
November 8, 2005, appellant filed a notice that a motion to certify a
conflict was pending in the court of appeals and, pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. IV(4)(A), this court stayed consideration of the
jurisdictional memoranda filed in this appeal. Whereas appellant
has neither notified this court that the court of appeals determined
that a conflict does not exist as provided by S.Ct.Prac.R. IV(4)(B)
nor filed a copy of the court of appeals' order certifying the existence
of a conflict as provided by S.Ct.Prac.R. IV(4)(C),
IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that appellant show cause
within 14 days from the date of this entry why this court should not
proceed to consider the jurisdictional memoranda in this appeal
pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. III(6).

2006-0328. State ex rel. Kuhar v. Medina Cty. Bd. of Elections.
In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a
complaint for a writ of mandamus involving an expedited election
matter. Upon consideration of relator's motion to file a reduced number
of copies of evidence, IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion is
granted, and the parties shall file an original plus two copies of the evidence.

2006-0378. State ex rel. McCray v. West.
Hamilton App. No. C-050955. This cause was filed as a discretionary
appeal and claimed appeal of right. Upon consideration of appellant's
jurisdictional memorandum, it is determined by the court that this cause
originated in the court of appeals and, therefore, should proceed as an
appeal of right pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. II(1)(A)(1).
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the Clerk shall issue an order for the
transmittal of the record from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County,
and the parties shall brief this case in accordance with S.Ct.Prac.R. VI.

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2006-0007. Smith v. Leis.
Hamilton App. No. C-050857, 2005-Ohio-6090 and 2006-Ohio-450.
This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals
for Hamilton County. It appears from the records of this court that appellant
has not filed a merit brief, due February 21, 2006, in compliance with
the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to
prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration
thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause is dismissed sua sponte.

MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following case has been referred to mediation pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6):
2006-0363. Bd. of Edn. of Kettering City Schools v. Montgomery
Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2004-A-1209.

Later

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home