Ohio Law

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

Friday, January 13, 2006

Supreme Court of Ohio Decisions and Case Announcements

MERIT DECISIONS WITH OPINIONS
2005-2258. Hernandez v. Kelly.
In Habeas Corpus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus and was considered in the manner
prescribed by law. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that a writ of habeas corpus is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent release petitioner from
prison forthwith, and that petitioner be released from postrelease control.
Opinion to follow.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and
Lanzinger, JJ., concur.

2005-1162. State ex rel. Union Cty. Veterans Serv. Comm. v. Parrott,
2006- Ohio-92.
In Mandamus. Writ granted.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and
Lanzinger, JJ., concur.


THE STATE EX REL. UNION COUNTY VETERANS SERVICE
COMMISSION v. PARROTT, JUDGE, ET AL.
[Cite as State ex rel. Union Cty. Veterans Serv. Comm. v. Parrott,
___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2006-Ohio-92.]
County veterans service commissions — R.C. 5901.02 — Mandamus
issued to compel judge to appoint member of commission.
(No. 2005-1162 ─ Submitted November 8, 2005 ─ Decided January 13, 2006.)
IN MANDAMUS.

MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

In re Report of Commission
On Continuing Legal Education
Christopher Thomas Travis,
(#0067699),
Respondent.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED by this court, sua sponte, that Christopher Thomas
Travis, Attorney Registration No. 0067699, last known business address
in Hamilton, Ohio, is found in contempt for failure to comply with this court's
order of December 5, 2003: to wit, failure to file an affidavit of compliance
on or before January 5, 2004.

Later

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Supreme Court of Ohio Accepting Comments Dealing with Proposed Regulations for the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law

The Supreme Court of Ohio will accept public comments until Feb. 8, 2006, on regulations for the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law. Comments on the regulations should be submitted in writing to Secretary of the Board D. Allan Asbury, Supreme Court of Ohio, 7th Floor, 65 S. Front St., Columbus, OH 43215, no later than Feb. 8, 2006. Please include your full name and mailing address in any comments submitted by email. Full text of the regs can be found here.

Later

Supreme Court of Ohio Accepting Comments on Proposed Change to Rules of Professional Conduct

The Supreme Court of Ohio will accept public comments until
February 15, 2006 on the proposed amendments to the Ohio Code
of Professional Conduct (DR 2-101) dealing with direct mail solicitation.

Later

1/12/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Announcements and Administrative Actions

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2005-2258. Hernandez v. Kelly.
In Habeas Corpus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Upon consideration of respondent’s
motion for leave to file additional authorities,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion is granted.
MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

2005-1930. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Bailey.
On December 30, 2005, respondent filed a motion for leave to file a
reply brief to relator's answer brief. Whereas there are no provisions
in Gov.Bar R. VII for filing a reply brief,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for leave to file a reply
brief is denied.

MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following case has been returned to the regular docket pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6)(E):
2005-1638. Strongsville Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, Nos. 2003-V-1617 and 2003-V-686.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

1. Proposed regulations for the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of
Law have been published for public comment.
2. Proposed amendments to DR 2-101 of the Ohio Code of Professional
Conduct have been published for public comment.

Later

Supreme Court of Ohio Hears Eminent Domain Case

City of Norwood v. Horney et al., Case nos. 2005-1210 and 2005-1211
1st District Court of Appeals (Hamilton County)

The Court heard arguments yesterday concerning the city of Norwood's ability to exercise its eminent domain powers. Here's a summary of the case, where the issue presented was:

"Does a city act unlawfully when it commissions an urban renewal study of a residential area previously targeted by a private developer, classifies the area as ‘deteriorating,' and subsequently uses its eminent domain powers to take (with compensation) the property of owners unwilling to vacate the targeted area to make way for private redevelopment?"

Also from the summary...

"The appellants urge the Court not to be swayed in their judgment of this case by the U.S. Supreme Court's June 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London . While a 5-4 majority of the Kelo court held that encouraging private business development can be a legitimate “public purpose” supporting eminent domain actions by a city, Horney and the Gambles point to a number of cases in which this Court has interpreted the Ohio Constitution to provide greater protection for individual rights than the U.S. Supreme Court has found under the federal constitution."

Click here for a link to archived oral argument audio for the case.

Click here for the text of the appellate decision.

Later

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

6th Circuit Rules Against Attorney in Erica Baker Case

The United States 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday that it had no jurisdiction in the matter concerning ex-public defender Beth Lewis' refusal to testify as to what her now-deceased client had told her concerning the disappearance of a Kettering, Ohio girl, Erica Baker, in 1999. The court threw the case back to state court, which had previously ruled that Lewis must testify.

The final paragraph of the decision read:

"Having had her day in court, Lewis seeks to profit from outrunning her
first state court contempt order by raising federal arguments that she
failed to raise when she had the chance. Lewis “has experimented with
the state courts and been beaten, and now seeks a different forum.”
Rosenthal, 148 U.S. at 147. Section 1442(a) of the removal statutes does
not confer federal jurisdiction for such purposes."

If you are not familiar with the case, the 6th Circuit opinion does a pretty good job with the fact scenario.

Later

1/11/2006 - Latest Ohio General Assembly Bill Introductions

SB 248 DENTAL ASSISTANTS (Armbruster) To allow dental assistants to remove orthodontic adhesives, bands and brackets from teeth. Am. 4715.39

SCR 22 STALKING AWARNESS (Clancy) Recognizing Stalking Awareness Month, January 2006. Full Text

HB 466 ELEVATOR MECHANICS (McGregor, J.) To require the superintendent of industrial compliance to regulate elevator mechanics and elevator contractors, to create the Elevator Safety Advisory Committee, and to make changes to the laws governing elevator servicing and inspections. Am. & En. 3781.19, 4105.01, 4105.011, 4105.012, 4105.02, 4105.05, 4105.10, 4105.12, 4105.13, 4105.15, 4105.16, 4105.17, 4105.022, 4105.023, 4105.99, and 4121.13.

HB 467 BUILDING ENERGY STANDARDS (Hughes) To require state agencies, state institutions of higher education, school districts, and community schools to comply with certain energy and environmentally efficient building standards, and to require the Director of Development to adopt those standards by rule. En. 153.03, 1551.17, 3313.377, & 3314.042.

Later

1/11/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Decisions

Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2006

2004-1145. Jaylin Investments, Inc. v. Moreland Hills, 2006-Ohio-4.
Cuyahoga App. No. 82739, 157 Ohio App.3d 277, 2004-Ohio-2689. Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Pfeifer and O'Donnell, JJ., dissent.
Opinion: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-4.pdf
Summary: Court Denies Constitutional Challenge to Village Zoning Regulation
Add'l Info: Real property – Zoning – Restriction of residential lot size to two-acre minimum – Constitutionality of restriction as applied to deny proposed use of half-acre lots in residential subdivision – Test is whether owner has demonstrated beyond fair debate that restriction, as applied to proposed use, is arbitrary, unreasonable, and without substantial relation to public health, safety, and welfare.

2005-0447. State ex rel. Downs v. Panioto, 2006-Ohio-8.
Hamilton App. No. C-040784, 2005-Ohio-778. Judgment reversed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-8.pdf
Summary: Prohibition—Alternative writ defined—Final orders—Lack of jurisdiction over incompetent party alleged—Service of process on incompetent—Capacity of incompetent to sue for divorce—Adequate remedy in ordinary course of law—Writ denied.

2005-0750. Columbus Bar Assn. v. Ross, 2006-Ohio-5.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 03-98. Leo Patrick Ross, Attorney Registration No. 0031061, is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for six months, stayed on conditions.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-5.pdf
Summary: Attorneys at law—Misconduct—Failure to inform client of lack of liability insurance—Conflict of interest—Representation of clients allegedly involved in criminal activity together—Six-month stayed suspension.

2005-1115. Columbus Bar Assn. v. Winkfield, 2006-Ohio-6.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 02-30. Lawrence Edward Winkfield, Attorney Registration No. 0034254, is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-6.pdf
Summary: Court Indefinitely Suspends Westerville Attorney
Add'l Info: Attorneys at law—Misconduct—Practicing law while license is under suspension—Conduct involving fraud, dishonesty, or misrepresentation—Intentionally damaging or prejudicing a client—Failure to deliver funds promptly to client—Failure to protect client’s interests before withdrawing from representation—Failure to refund unearned fees upon withdrawal—Neglect of an entrusted legal matter—Intentional failure to complete contract of professional employment—Failure to promptly return client’s property—Failure to cooperate in disciplinary proceedings—Illegal conduct involving moral turpitude—Illegal discrimination—Accepting employment with risk of conflict of interest—Charging excessive fees—Misappropriation from trust account—Mental illness as mitigating—Indefinite suspension.

2005-1251. State ex rel. Boylen v. Harmon, 2006-Ohio-7.
Stark App. No. 2005CA00104. Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-7.pdf
Summary: R.C. 2935.10 governs procedure for affidavits filed under R.C. 2935.09 — No conflict between R.C. 2935.10 and Crim.R. 4(A) in this case.

Later

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

1/10/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Announcements

MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following case has been referred to mediation pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6):

2005-2418. State ex rel. Hawkes v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 05AP-47, 2005-Ohio-5995.

The following cases have been returned to the regular docket
pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6)(E):

2005-1812. State ex rel. Cliff v. Auburndale Co.
Franklin App. No. 03AP-365, 2005-Ohio-3984.

2005-1865. State ex rel. Donley v. Kessler.
In Prohibition.

Later

Ohio Department of Taxation Offers Another Release Concerning the Commercial Activity Tax

The Ohio Department of Taxation (ODT) has issued an information
release regarding the Commercial Activity Tax (CAT).
This release provides a legal definition and examples of what
constitutes a taxable gross receipt for purposes of the CAT.
The release is posted on ODT's Web site, tax.ohio.gov.

Later

Monday, January 09, 2006

1/9/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Announcements

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2005-0749. State v. Brown.
Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-447563. This cause is pending before the court as a death
penalty appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga County. On
December 20, 2005, appellant filed a motion to supplement the record with the
transcript of the arraignment. The transcript was subsequently certified and
transmitted to this court by the trial court clerk and was filed as a supplemental
record in this case on January 3, 2006. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to supplement the record is
denied as moot.


MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2005-2051. State ex rel. Gray v. Bailey.
In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a
writ of mandamus. Upon consideration of the joint application for dismissal,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal is granted.
Accordingly, this cause is dismissed.

Later