Search for: "M. S. R.C." Results 61 - 80 of 233
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Dec 2016, 11:03 am by MBettman
Key  Statutes and Precedent R.C. 2315(A)(5) (“Occurrence” means all claims resulting from or arising out of any one person’s bodily injury.) [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 6:36 pm
Pursuant to R.C. 2925.51(E), the defendant seeks to have an independent analysis of the substance. [read post]
30 Dec 2019, 5:25 am by MBettman
R.C. 2929.19(B)(5) (Before imposing financial sanctions under R.C. 2929.18, the trial court is required to consider the felony offender’s present and future ability to pay the sanction.) [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 11:18 am by MBettman
The certified-conflict question is “[m]ay a trial court exercise jurisdiction to seal the record of a pardoned conviction where the petitioner has other offenses on his record? [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 9:48 am
I'm certainly no expert on Ohio law, but this decision appears to represent a sea change in that state's high court, at least with respect to punitive damages.FURTHER UPDATE (by Jeremy Rosen on 2/5/08 at 10:45 pm): To follow-up on Curt's point, a 2004 analysis of the Ohio Supreme Court describes its history of decisions striking down tort reform legislation passed by the Legislature and suggests that the court was then at a crossroads with a consistent 4-3… [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 6:54 am by MBettman
SOI subsequently filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, claiming that New Riegel’s claims were time-barred by Ohio’s construction statute of repose, R.C. 2305.131. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 10:17 am by MBettman
R.C. 2945.371 The opinion next looks that the history and purpose of R.C. 2945.371, the section of the criminal code dealing with evaluations and reports of a defendant’s mental condition. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 12:58 pm by MBettman
Cheatham took the position that under R.C. 1308.16(A) (Ohio’s version of U.C.C. 8-302) a purchaser of a security acquires all rights in the security the transferor had. [read post]
6 Aug 2018, 7:11 am by MBettman
 The issue in the case is whether a criminal defendant on post-release control (“PRC”) for a prior felony must be advised, during his plea hearing in a new felony case, of the trial court’s ability under R.C. 2929.141 to impose a consecutive prison sentence for the PRC violation. [read post]