Search for: "S. D. R.C." Results 81 - 100 of 294
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jun 2015, 10:12 am by MBettman
In that case the court held that suit by a group of tenants against its landlords for violation of certain provisions of Ohio’s Landlord Tenant Act was a tort, and thus the cap on punitive damages codified at R.C. 2315.21(D)(2)(a) applied. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 4:16 pm by MBettman
Frank and London’s Argument This appeal involves the proper interpretation of R.C. 2305.09 (D), the statute of limitations that both parties agree applies in this case. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 6:35 am by MBettman
Key Precedent Ohio Constitution, Article II, Section 15(D) (“No bill shall contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 1:33 pm
Ohio's highest court resolved conflicting state court decisions without batting an eye: We hold that a police officer’s unaided visual estimation of a vehicle’s speed, by itself, is sufficient to support a conviction for violation of R.C. 4511.21 (D) without independent verification of the vehicles speed if the officer is trained, is certified by the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy or a similar organization…and is experienced… [read post]
23 Jul 2011, 4:50 pm by Eugene Volokh
Read plainly, even though R.C. 2925.11(D) does not create a criminal record, minor misdemeanor possession is still a conviction which is premised upon a statutorily-designated drug abuse offense; to wit, marijuana possession. [read post]
28 Feb 2013, 2:44 pm by ipandentertainmentlaw
  This special day was sponsored by Texas Senators: Robert Deuell (R) and Leticia Van de Putte (D), and Texas Representatives: Myra Crownover (R) and Ryan Guillen (D). [read post]
28 Mar 2016, 8:35 am by MBettman
Kaiser, 2012-Ohio-5686 (The medical malpractice statute of repose found in R.C. 2305.11(C) does not extinguish a vested right and thus does not violate the Ohio Constitution’s right to a remedy provision.) [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 10:14 am by MBettman
Pursuant to R.C. 2929.03(D)(3), the trial court may sentence a defendant to death only if the court finds, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the aggravating circumstances in a case outweigh any mitigating factors. [read post]
4 May 2007, 1:10 pm
  The court held that the subsection of  the statute that was found unconstitutional, R.C. 2953.82(D), can be severed from the remainder of the post-conviction testing statute. [read post]