Robert R. Cupp

The case concerned Cuthbert Greenhouses' declaratory judgment action against Taylor Township, seeking to determine whether the township's zoning regulation prohibiting common access driveways for residential lots conflicted with Union County access management regulations and was therefore void. Cuthbert had divided its 172-acre property into multiple tracts but had not applied for any zoning permits or indicated plans to build dwellings. The trial court found no conflict between the regulations and upheld the township's rules. The appeals court reversed, concluding that the action was not justiciable because no real controversy existed, as it was unclear whether the township regulation would even apply given the absence of dwellings or permit applications, and remanded for dismissal.

propertyprocedure

The case involved James Hazlett's appeal from his conviction in Logan County Common Pleas Court for gross sexual imposition based on an allegation that he inappropriately touched his granddaughter. Hazlett had confessed during a police interview after signing a Miranda waiver, and the trial court denied his motion to suppress the statement, finding that his comment about needing an attorney was not an unequivocal invocation of the right to counsel and that officers did not improperly pressure him. At trial, the jury convicted him primarily on the basis of the confession and the victim's testimony, but the appellate court reversed the judgment, holding that the trial court erred by admitting hearsay testimony from the victim's mother under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule, as the statement was made hours later after reflection and was not harmless given that the case turned on credibility determinations between Hazlett and the victim. The court remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned the interpretation of Richard Ditto's will, which granted his wife Pollie a life estate in his one-half interest in certain land with the power to sell and consume the property during widowhood but prohibited gifting, along with a remainder clause upon her death. After Pollie sold the land and later died, her grandchildren (the appellants) sued to recover unconsumed sale proceeds that Pollie had attempted to dispose of through her own will, challenging the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the defendants. The appellate court reversed, holding that the will language created only a life estate and that any identifiable unconsumed proceeds passed under Richard's will rather than Pollie's, as the will did not authorize her to devise the remainder.

property

The case involved defendant Vernon C. Leugers, Jr., who was convicted after a negotiated guilty plea to multiple felony counts of gross sexual imposition, attempted pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, and disseminating matter harmful to a juvenile, and who later sought to withdraw that plea post-sentencing. The trial court denied the motion to withdraw, finding that res judicata barred the claims and that Leugers had not shown the required manifest injustice under Crim. R. 32.1. On appeal, the court affirmed, holding that the record showed Leugers understood the charges and penalties when pleading guilty, that his claims of ineffective assistance and other errors lacked supporting evidence, and that no hearing was required because the allegations did not establish manifest injustice. The court also found the res judicata argument moot given the absence of manifest injustice.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether a county's public construction project was subject to Ohio's prevailing wage requirements under R.C. 4115.03 et seq. The court held that the project did not trigger those requirements because informal contractor proposals reasonably estimated its cost below the statutory threshold amount. The concurring opinion reasoned that the statute does not define 'fairly estimated' or mandate use of prevailing wage rates in the initial cost projection, and nothing in the record showed the cost would exceed the threshold even if those rates were applied. The court therefore affirmed the trial court's ruling that the county was not required to comply with the prevailing wage law.

labor & employmentbusiness & regulatory

In this case, an incarcerated plaintiff sued his sister and brother-in-law for breach of fiduciary duty and related claims including fraud, theft, and conversion, alleging misuse of a power of attorney granted in 2003. The trial court dismissed the action for failure to prosecute after the plaintiff did not appear for a scheduled jury trial via telephone, despite prior orders allowing telephonic participation. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying various pretrial motions such as those for summary judgment hearings, contempt sanctions for discovery violations, or writs, and that local rules provided sufficient notice that failure to appear could result in dismissal.

proceduretorts & liabilityfamily law

The case concerned a dispute between contractor Greg Ward and homeowners Pete and Chris Geiger over a home construction project. Ward sued for breach of contract and unjust enrichment after the Geigers refused to pay for numerous additions to the original plans that were not put in writing, while the Geigers countersued for breach of contract and violations of the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act. The trial court directed a verdict against Ward on the breach claim but the jury awarded him $46,187.14 on unjust enrichment and rejected the Geigers' counterclaims. On appeal, the court held that the written contract did not bar the unjust enrichment claim because its price term covered only the original specifications, but it found error in the admission of undifferentiated invoices and in the jury's verdict on the OCSPA counterclaim. The appellate court therefore affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a new trial on the affected issues.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved an employment discrimination lawsuit filed by Trido Rogers against Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, which was later voluntarily dismissed and refiled. The parties reached an oral settlement agreement in May 2005, but Rogers refused to comply, claiming he had not authorized it and that it was not final until reduced to writing. Goodyear moved to enforce the settlement, and after a hearing the trial court granted the motion while also imposing $8,925 in attorney fees and costs against Rogers as a sanction for frivolous conduct. On appeal, the court affirmed enforcement of the settlement, finding no abuse of discretion in limiting cross-examination of a witness, but reversed the sanctions award because the trial court failed to provide the required notice, hearing date, and findings under R.C. 2323.51 before imposing them. The matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved defendant Grace A. Huston, who was arrested and charged with two second-degree misdemeanors (resisting arrest and obstructing official business) and later moved to dismiss the charges on speedy trial grounds before her October 24, 2005 trial. The trial court denied the motion, convicted Huston after trial, and imposed concurrent 90-day sentences; she appealed, arguing that more than 90 days had elapsed without trial in violation of R.C. 2945.71(B). The appellate court affirmed, holding that the speedy-trial clock was tolled for the periods attributable to Huston's own requests for a pretrial and continuances of pretrial dates (from June 6 through September 15), because those continuances were granted on her motion or by her agreement and were not facially unreasonable. Adding only the undisputed periods that counted against the state (May 7–June 6 and September 15–October 24) yielded a total of 70 days, which fell within the statutory 90-day limit, so no violation occurred.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves a legal malpractice claim brought by Pamela Reimund against her former attorney Drew Hanna. Reimund alleged that Hanna failed to timely file a tort claim for assault within the statute of limitations in her divorce proceedings. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Hanna, finding that the Hancock County Court of Common Pleas had subject-matter jurisdiction over the tort claim despite its filing in the domestic relations division, and that the claim remained pending, so Reimund could not yet prove damages. The appellate court affirmed the decision, holding that the administrative division of cases did not limit jurisdiction and that the tort claim had not been resolved or abandoned in the divorce case.

torts & liabilityfamily lawprocedure

The case involved a self-insured employer, Allied Holdings, that sought to recover workers' compensation benefits paid to employee Steven Meade by filing common-law claims such as fraud, misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment in the Logan County Court of Common Pleas after the Industrial Commission found Meade had engaged in remunerative work but had not committed fraud. The trial court dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and the court of appeals affirmed. The appellate court reasoned that Ohio's workers' compensation system, established under the state constitution and statutes, provides the exclusive remedy and procedure for such disputes, and R.C. 4123.511(J)(4) authorizes recovery through other means only when fraud has been determined by the Industrial Commission or administrator. Because no such determination occurred and no other statute granted the trial court authority, the common-law claims could not proceed independently. The court declined to overrule its prior precedent holding that jurisdiction lies only through administrative appeal.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case concerned a dispute among the three shareholders of Wingers, Inc., an Ohio close corporation operating a restaurant, where Thomas held 40% ownership as president and the Fletcher brothers held the remaining shares as officers. Thomas formed a separate LLC to purchase the property after the Fletchers declined involvement, then leased it back to Wingers; when lease renewal talks failed, the Fletchers terminated Thomas's employment, prompting his claims for breach of fiduciary duty, duty of loyalty, and wrongful termination, along with the defendants' counterclaims. The trial court granted Thomas partial summary judgment on liability, a jury later awarded damages, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that no genuine issues of material fact existed to preclude summary judgment and that the defendants failed to demonstrate legitimate business reasons that would defeat the fiduciary claims.

business & regulatoryprocedure

In Dunn v. Honda of America, an employee who suffered a 1997 work-related right knee injury sought an additional workers' compensation allowance for aggravation of her pre-existing osteoarthritis after already receiving benefits for a meniscus tear and chondromalacia. The Industrial Commission granted the additional allowance, and the trial court affirmed. On appeal, Honda argued that the evidence failed to show the injury caused a compensable aggravation rather than natural disease progression. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that medical testimony established the injury increased the employee's symptoms sufficiently to constitute an aggravation under Ohio workers' compensation law, even without a mechanical change to the underlying condition, and that the disability was not shown to result primarily from natural deterioration.

labor & employment

This case involved defendant David Walker, who was convicted by a jury in Seneca County on two counts of crack cocaine trafficking based on controlled buys conducted by a confidential informant in 2003. Walker appealed his convictions and consecutive fifteen-month sentences, raising claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, improper admission of evidence regarding his prior police contacts and nicknames, and the trial court's authority to impose consecutive sentences. The court affirmed the convictions, finding no deficient performance or prejudice from counsel's actions and no plain error in the evidentiary issues. However, it vacated the sentences and remanded for resentencing because the consecutive sentencing statute had been held unconstitutional by the Ohio Supreme Court in State v. Foster, which eliminated the requirement for judicial factfinding.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute between insureds Ronald and Susan Snyder and their insurers over whether underinsured motorist coverage limits on a policy had increased from $25,000 to $300,000 by operation of law because an earlier reduction form was invalid under precedent. After the trial court granted the Snyders' motion in limine to bar extrinsic evidence about the policy reduction, the parties entered an agreed judgment entry declaring the higher limits applied and preserving the insurers' objections for appeal. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, reasoning that a motion-in-limine ruling is an interlocutory order that is not final and appealable and that parties cannot confer jurisdiction on the court by stipulation.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved defendant Starkey, a convicted sex offender classified as a sexual predator, who was charged with failing to register a change of address under Ohio Revised Code 2950.05 after authorities determined he was no longer living at his registered residence with his parents. Starkey was convicted by a jury after trial, and he appealed the denial of his motion for acquittal, arguing insufficient evidence because he claimed to have stayed in a tent on the same property without establishing a new residence elsewhere. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, holding that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence—including testimony that Starkey had stopped living at the address and searches failing to locate his claimed tent during the relevant period—for a reasonable jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that he had changed his address without notifying the sheriff.

criminal law

The case concerned the validity of a traffic stop of defendant Phillips, where the trial court had ruled that minor lane violations did not create reasonable suspicion of impairment without additional evidence, and the state appealed. The court affirmed the trial court's suppression of the stop, finding no reasonable suspicion because the alleged lane violations were not visible on the videotape and there was no other erratic driving. On probable cause, the court held that driving on the white edge line did not violate R.C. 4511.12 as it is not a traffic control device providing instruction, and the officer's observation of a possible license plate light violation under R.C. 4513.05 was not supported by credible evidence once he followed the vehicle, as confirmed by the videotape and lack of citation. The court declined to address an unraised argument under R.C. 4511.33 regarding marked lines.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Timothy Endicott's appeal of his sentence after pleading guilty to six felony counts, including two counts of kidnapping, aggravated robbery, vandalism, escape, and assault, stemming from an armed robbery at a drive-thru and a subsequent escape attempt from custody. The trial court imposed a total prison term of ten years and six months, with some sentences running consecutively. Endicott argued that the sentence exceeded the minimum and violated the legislative intent of Ohio Revised Code 2929.14 favoring minimum terms for first-time offenders. The court affirmed the sentence, holding that State v. Foster rendered the relevant statutory provisions unconstitutional, granting trial courts full discretion to impose sentences within the statutory range without required findings. It concluded there was no abuse of discretion given the facts and circumstances.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved defendant Martine Gooden, who committed multiple thefts, forgeries, and two aggravated robberies using a BB gun between August and December 2005, leading to a 19-count indictment. Gooden pled guilty to two counts of aggravated robbery, one count of theft by threat, four counts of theft, and two counts of forgery, and received consecutive sentences totaling 12 years and 11 months. On appeal, Gooden argued that aggravated robbery and theft by threat were allied offenses of similar import, that his counsel was ineffective for not raising competency or allied-offense issues, and that the Ohio Supreme Court's Foster decision violated the Ex Post Facto Clause by altering sentencing presumptions. The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that Gooden waived the allied-offense and ex post facto claims by not raising them below, that plain error did not exist, that the offenses were not allied under the Rance standard because their elements did not correspond in the abstract, and that counsel's performance was not deficient given the record. The court also rejected the ineffective-assistance claim related to competency because no evidence suggested Gooden lacked mental competence.

criminal law

This case concerns evidentiary rulings in a criminal trial for sexual offenses, specifically whether the defendant could cross-examine the victim about a prior partially recanted accusation of sexual abuse against another individual. The dissenting opinion concludes that the trial court correctly refused to permit the questioning, as the defense provided insufficient evidence that the prior accusation was totally false and unfounded rather than involving some form of sexual activity. The dissent reasons that Ohio's rape shield statute under R.C. 2907.02(D) bars such inquiry absent a showing of total falsity, consistent with State v. Boggs, and that the prosecution's limited references to other abusers did not open the door to broader examination. It further holds that the motion in limine hearing effectively satisfied the in camera review requirements, so no additional hearing was needed.

criminal lawprocedure