Ohio Law

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

Friday, April 14, 2006

4/14/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Announcements

DISCIPLINARY CASES

2005-2442. In re Resignation of Doan.
On affidavit of resignation from the practice of law of Burgess
Leon Doan, Attorney Registration No. 0004889, and on report
filed under seal by Disciplinary Counsel.
Resignation accepted with disciplinary action pending.

MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

2005-1930. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Bailey.
This cause is pending before the court on the report of the
Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law. On March 14, 2006,
the board filed a notice of clarification of hearing record. On
March 20, 2006, respondent filed objections to
the notice. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by this court that the objections are denied.

2005-1930. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Bailey.
This cause is pending before the court on the report of the
Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law. On February 8, 2006,
respondent filed a motion for Supreme Court of Ohio to take judicial
notice. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by this court that the motion is denied.



In re Report of the Commission
on Continuing Legal Education
Joseph James Velisek
(0018557),
Respondent.
CLE-2005-18557
ENTRY
This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education (the "commission")
pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d). The commission
recommended the imposition of sanctions against certain attorneys
and judges, including the abovenamed respondent, for failure to
comply with the applicable continuing legal education provisions of
Gov.Bar R. X and Gov.Jud.R. IV, for the 2003-2004 reporting period.
On December 13, 2005, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(1), this court
issued to the respondent an order to show cause why the recommended
sanction should not be adopted by the court and an order so entered
against the respondent. It has now come to the court's attention that
the respondent is deceased.
Upon consideration thereof,
It is ordered by the court that the recommendation of a sanction
against the above-named respondent, and the related matter now
pending before the court, are hereby dismissed.

In re Report of the Commission :
on Continuing Legal Education. :
:
Eric Lance Overstreet : E N T R Y
(#0055722), :
Respondent. : CLE-05-55722
This cause originated under the enforcement proceedings of
Gov.Bar R. X, Attorney Continuing Legal Education. Respondent
has filed a reply to answers to objections filed by the Commission
on Continuing Legal Education on March 13, 2006. Whereas there
are no provisions under Gov.Bar R. X(6) for the filing of a reply,
IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that the reply is stricken.


In re Report of the Commission
on Continuing Legal Education
George M. Newsham
(0069294),
Respondent.
CLE-2005-69294
ENTRY
This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education (the "commission")
pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d). The commission
recommended the imposition of sanctions against certain attorneys
and judges, including the abovenamed respondent, for failure to
comply with the applicable continuing legal education provisions of
Gov.Bar R. X and Gov.Jud.R. IV, for the 2003-2004 reporting period.
On December 13, 2005, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(1), this court
issued to the respondent an order to show cause why the recommended
sanction should not be adopted by the court and an order so entered
against the respondent. It has now come to the court's attention that
the respondent is deceased.
Upon consideration thereof,
It is ordered by the court that the recommendation of a sanction
against the above-named respondent, and the related matter now
pending before the court, are hereby dismissed.

Later

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Supreme Court of Ohio Releases Decision Concerning Open Records and Executive Privilege

THE STATE EX REL. DANN v. TAFT.
[Cite as State ex rel. Dann v. Taft, __ Ohio St.3d ___, 2006-Ohio-1825.]
Public records—Executive privilege—Qualified gubernatorial-communications
privilege recognized—Procedure for invoking and overcoming privilege.
(No. 2005-1222 ─ Submitted November 9, 2005 ─ Decided April 13, 2006.)
IN MANDAMUS.
__________________
SYLLABUS OF THE COURT
1. A governor of Ohio has a qualified gubernatorial-communications privilege
that protects communications to or from the governor when the
communications were made for the purpose of fostering informed and
sound gubernatorial deliberations, policymaking, and decisionmaking.
2. The qualified gubernatorial-communications privilege is overcome when a
requester demonstrates that the requester has a particularized need to
review the communications and that that need outweighs the public’s
interest in according confidentiality to communications made to or from
the governor.

Later

Ohio Courts Need More Interpreters According to Report

Ohio courts need help recruiting and employing qualified interpreters , according to a report released April 7th by the Supreme Court of Ohio Interpreter Services Program.
The “Report on the Use of Interpreters in Ohio Courts” found that more than 18,465 interpretations involving 57 languages are performed annually in Ohio courtrooms. About 63 percent of interpreters do some work in the courts and the top five languages they interpret are Spanish, which makes up 81 percent of the cases involving interpretation, American Sign Language, Somali, Russian and Arabic.

For more information, click here.

Later

U.S. Supreme Court Rule Change Allows Citing to Unpublished Federal Opinions

From law.com:

"The Supreme Court on Wednesday adopted a historic rule change that will allow lawyers to cite so-called unpublished opinions in federal courts starting next year. The new rule takes effect unless Congress countermands it before Dec. 1."

"Under the new rule, circuits will still be able to give varying precedential weight to unpublished opinions, but they can no longer keep lawyers from citing them -- in the same way lawyers cite rulings from other circuits or other authorities, such as law review articles."

Later

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

4/12/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Decisions

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

2003-1904. State v. Ferguson , 2006-Ohio-1502.
Montgomery C.P. No. 02-CR-0353. Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-1502.pdf
Summary: Dayton Killer’s Death Sentence Affirmed

2003-1913. Community First Bank & Trust v. Dafoe, 2006-Ohio-1503.
Van Wert App. No. 15-03-04 . Judgment affirmed. Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, O'Connor and O'Donnell, JJ., concur.
Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-1503.pdf

2005-0132. N. Olmsted City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Cleveland Mun. School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 2006-Ohio-1504.
Cuyahoga App. No. 84372, 2004-Ohio-6422. Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, O'Connor and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton and O'Donnell, JJ., dissent.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-1504.pdf

2005-1889. State ex rel. Grissom v. McGookey, 2006-Ohio-1506.
Erie App. No. E-05-055, 2005-Ohio-4433. Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-1506.pdf

2005-2201. State ex rel. Pamer v. Collier, 2006-Ohio-1507.
Medina App. No. 05CA0083-M. Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-1507.pdf

Later

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

4/11/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Announcements

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

1987-0327. State v. Clark.
Lucas App. No. L-84-443. By entry filed March 8, 2006, this
court ordered that appellant’s sentence be carried into execution on
Tuesday, the 2nd day of May, 2006. In order to facilitate this court’s
timely consideration of any matters relating to the execution of
appellant’s sentence,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the Chief Justice may suspend
application of any provisions of the Rules of Practice of the
Supreme Court, including, but not limited to, the filing requirements
imposed by S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(1).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that service of documents as required by
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(2) shall be personal or by facsimile transmission.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that counsel of record for
the parties shall supply this court with a copy of any document relating
to this matter that is filed in, or issued by, any other court in this state
or any federal court, as well as any commutation, pardon, or warrant
of reprieve issued by the Governor. A copy of the document shall be
delivered to the Office of the Clerk as soon as possible, either personally
or by facsimile transmission.

Later