Search for: "Matter of R.C." Results 81 - 100 of 421
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Apr 2019, 6:32 am by MBettman
 As a matter of public policy, the Court should conform to Marsy’s Law and determine the banks to be victims, and thus be permitted to receive restitution. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 8:25 am by MBettman
The dissenting judge would find that R.C. 3107.07(A) must be strictly construed in favor of a non-consenting parent, and that a child support payment, no matter how meager, is still maintenance and support, thus requiring parental consent to the adoption. [read post]
28 Feb 2019, 6:23 am by MBettman
The legislature found this to be a matter of statewide concern, affecting the general welfare of all employees, and the right to live wherever one wishes. [read post]
5 Jun 2019, 6:00 am by MBettman
While the question of whether there was sufficient evidence to convict is certainly of concern to the state, it is the precedent here that most matters. [read post]
25 Oct 2022, 5:21 am by Eugene Volokh
Thus, they pertain to a law-enforcement matter and cannot be characterized as simply a personnel document. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 5:12 am by MBettman
(“It matters not whether the action is brought in tort or contract, if the resultant damages are injury to property of the type set forth in R.C. 2305.131, the statute applies. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 3:59 am by Russ Bensing
”  Pfeifer may not be the justice on the court who provides the most penetrating legal analyses, but he has an uncanny ability to get to the heart of the matter, and he does so in his dissent: Mullen was able to use the law as a weapon because same-sex coparents lack legal rights. [read post]
16 Apr 2018, 6:43 am by MBettman
Dunson’s claim that monies in his prison account are exempt from garnishment to satisfy the order of costs is a civil matter. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 11:55 am by MBettman
Therefore, R.C. 2107.15—Ohio’s voiding statute—does not apply to a noncomplying will under R.C. 2107.24. [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 4:40 am by Jon Hyman
[pdf], the Ohio Supreme Court recently held: The necessary elements of a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge under R.C. 4123.90 do not include proof that the plaintiff suffered a workplace injury. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 4:15 am by Jon Hyman
As a technical matter, in Ohio, R.C. 4123.01(A)(1)(c) lists 20 factors to determine whether a person is an “employee” for purposes of workers’ compensation; if 10 of those criteria are met, the worker is an employee. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:58 am by MBettman
The legislature found this to be a matter of statewide concern, affecting the general welfare of all employees, and the right to live wherever one wishes. [read post]