Search for: "In the Interest of: R.C."
Results 261 - 280
of 395
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2015, 10:40 am
This turned out not to be a good idea, because amicus counsel really wanted to talk about the safety issues involved with the use of non-OEM parts, but the court wasn’t interested in hearing that. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 9:34 am
R.C. 1303.67(A) states that an instrument is paid to a person entitled to enforce the instrument. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 7:48 am
It will be interesting to see if it will. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 7:13 am
The statute in this case doesn’t protect a person’s liberty interest the way the statute did in Brown-it is more a sharing of police resources. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 6:30 am
Pepper Pike gave courts extrastatutory discretion to seal records in unusual and exceptional cases after weighing the applicant’s interest in sealing the records against the government’s interest in maintaining the records. [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 12:21 pm
The Sixth District reasoned that although the traffic stop was made in violation of R.C. 4513.39, it did not violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 4:19 pm
R.C., involved the biological parents of a fourteen (14) year old boy each seeking to be designated as the parent of primary residence approximately ten (10) years after entering into a consent order resolving all issues of custody between them. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 9:07 am
White, the 2002 decision that changed the landscape in judicial elections by giving judges and judicial candidates more free speech (and some say unwisely so): “ I am concerned that, even aside from what judicial candidates may say while campaigning, the very practice of electing judges undermines this interest. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 2:09 pm
However, what clearly is missing from the list of statutes in R.C. 5722.22 is a reference to CERCLA. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 8:25 am
Justice O’Neill’s Dissent First, Justice O’Neill thinks the case should have been dismissed as improvidently allowed, because it is not of great or general interest, and involves no constitutional question. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 12:21 pm
(R.C. 2317.421, construed.) [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 8:10 am
At issue in this case was the interpretation of Ohio’s corporate advancement statute, R.C. 1701. 13 (E)(5). [read post]
25 Sep 2014, 10:21 am
The Challenged Statutes R.C. 2152.10(A)(2)(b) (Transfer is mandatory for offenses by juveniles involving a firearm) R.C. 2152.12(A)(1)(b) (Transfer is mandatory for certain offenses if the child is sixteen or seventeen at the time of the act charged.) [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 7:08 am
White Hat had the power to bind the Schools to third party contracts, to act on their behalf, and to advance their interests. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 6:37 am
The trial court determined that Vanderbilt (a mortgage holder with a recorded interest in the property) was a “person entitled to redeem” under Ohio Revised Code Section (“R.C. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 7:16 am
” The code sections implicated here are R.C. 4112.02(A), which makes employment discrimination on the basis of a person’s sex unlawful, and R.C. 4112.01(A)(2), which defines employer to include “any person acting directly or indirectly in the interest of an employer. [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 3:40 pm
“The scope-of-agency determination necessarily turns upon a multitude of considerations and fact-specific inquiries that R.C. 4735.21 does not address,” wrote French. [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 11:18 am
R.C. 2953.31 & 2953.32, originally enacted in 1973. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 12:53 pm
After the case commenced in juvenile court, it was transferred to adult court pursuant to R.C. 2152.10(A)(2)(b). [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 7:10 am
R.C. 3109.04(D)(2)( authorizes domestic relations court to certify the case to juvenile court if it is not in the best interest of the child to reside with either parent.) [read post]
