Rae-Ann Geneva, Inc. v. Blakeslee
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019-02-08
The case involved a nursing facility (Rae-Ann Geneva) that sued resident Robert Blakeslee for unpaid services provided in 2014 and obtained a summary judgment against him for about $15,603 plus interest. After multiple agreed temporary vacations of the judgment to allow Medicaid claims and adjustments, the trial court reinstated the judgment in October 2016; Blakeslee then filed a motion for relief from judgment alleging new evidence and fraud based on Medicaid payments and an Ohio Administrative Code provision barring collection of any difference between the Medicaid rate and the provider’s charges. The trial court denied the motion, and the Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that Blakeslee had been aware of the Medicaid coverage and related arguments well before the final judgment was entered and therefore could not use Civ.R. 60(B) to relitigate issues that should have been raised earlier or on direct appeal.
healthcareprocedurebusiness & regulatory
In re J.D.B.
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019-02-08 · cited 2×
In re J.D.B. involved an appeal by mother Heather Butcher from a juvenile court decision adjudicating her minor son as a dependent and neglected child and placing him in agency custody after she left him with a non-relative, became unreachable, was later hospitalized for mental health issues without stable housing, and was reported to have drug involvement while the father was incarcerated. The Court of Appeals affirmed the adjudication, holding that a non-attorney agency employee could properly file the complaint under Juv.R. 10(A) and R.C. 2151.27, that denial of a continuance for the mother's drug treatment was within the court's discretion, that reasonable-efforts findings were not required at the adjudicatory stage, and that the evidence supported findings of dependency under R.C. 2151.04(A)–(C) and neglect under R.C. 2151.03(A)(2)–(3). The court rejected the mother's other procedural objections, concluding the juvenile court's rulings were consistent with applicable statutes and rules.
family lawprocedure
Conneaut v. Rowe
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019-02-08
The case concerned whether Conneaut police had reasonable suspicion to stop Jodi Rowe for suspected drunk driving after an anonymous caller reported a vehicle “all over the roadway” and an officer followed her, observing her nearly drive off the road into rocks before initiating the stop; Rowe was then charged with DUI and related traffic offenses. The municipal court granted her motion to suppress, ruling that the tip lacked indicia of reliability and that the officer’s testimony did not establish a marked-lanes violation. The Eleventh District Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that the totality of circumstances—including the tip’s details and the officer’s direct observations of erratic driving—provided sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify the investigatory stop under established Fourth Amendment standards.
criminal lawprocedure
Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran Retirement Servs., Inc. v. Cesta
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019-02-08 · cited 1×
The case involved a nursing facility, Shepherd of the Valley, suing the executor of Rose Cesta’s estate to recover about $24,867 for unpaid room, board, and care services provided before her death in May 2016. The trial court granted summary judgment to the executor, and the Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that the claim was barred by R.C. 2117.06 because it had not been properly presented within six months of the decedent’s death. Although the facility petitioned for appointment of a special administrator on the final day of the statutory period, the appointment and formal presentment occurred after the deadline, and the court ruled that the creditor bears the responsibility to secure a timely presentation, with no exception for delays in judicial appointment.
healthcareprocedure
Friedenberg v. Friedenberg
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019-02-04 · cited 2×
In Friedenberg v. Friedenberg, a divorce case in the Lake County Court of Common Pleas involving custody and spousal support claims, the wife appealed the trial court's order releasing her mental health records from the Cleveland Psychoanalytic Center to her husband's counsel under a protective order. The Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the wife had waived the physician-patient privilege by placing her physical and mental condition at issue through her requests for custody (under R.C. 3109.04(F)(1)(e)) and spousal support. The court reasoned that Ohio law creates an exception to the privilege in such proceedings, that the magistrate conducted an in camera review confirming relevance, and that the protective order sufficiently limited dissemination to counsel, parties, and experts.
family law
Whitright v. Whitright
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019-02-04 · cited 2×
The case concerned whether a foreclosure judgment entered in favor of Geauga Savings Bank on its cross-claim was void for lack of personal jurisdiction because the bank allegedly failed to serve the cross-claim on appellants Rodney and Dorothy Whitright under Civ.R. 5, even though they had been served with the original partition complaint. The trial court denied the appellants’ motion to vacate the judgment, and the Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed. The majority concluded that the trial court retained jurisdiction over the appellants as to the cross-claim, so the judgment was not void; the provided excerpt reflects the dissent’s contrary view that defective service on the cross-claim deprived the court of jurisdiction and rendered the foreclosure, sheriff’s sale, and confirmation order void.
procedureproperty