Search for: "D. R.C. V."
Results 121 - 140
of 258
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jan 2017, 7:29 am
State v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 7:00 am
Cobb v. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 7:42 am
By: Stephen D. [read post]
16 Dec 2016, 11:03 am
“It’s déjà vu all over again. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 6:38 am
State v. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 6:31 am
By Stephen D. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 11:12 am
Vacating a plea under R.C. 2943.031(D) would, however. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 7:27 am
At issue in this case was the interpretation of the term “transact business” in R.C. 4117.13(D) in order to establish jurisdiction in a court of common pleas over an appeal from a State Employment Relations Board unfair labor practice adjudication. [read post]
28 Oct 2016, 11:49 am
Sedar v. [read post]
22 Aug 2016, 6:28 am
The statutory phrase, “transacts business” in R.C. 4117.13(D) is not ambiguous. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 8:25 am
The Tenth District read ambiguity into R.C. 4117.13(D) where none exits. [read post]
29 Jul 2016, 7:49 am
Merit Decision On December 6, 2012, the Supreme Court handed down a merit decision in Doss v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 9:09 am
Trust Co. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 8:39 am
Miller v. [read post]
25 May 2016, 11:28 am
As I posted here, after the Supreme Court of Ohio reversed and remanded this case to apply the punitive damages cap in R.C. 2315.21(D)(2)(a) to the two million dollar punitive damages judgment, arguing began in earnest over the amount and the distribution of the punitive damages. [read post]
13 May 2016, 6:22 am
Zier v. [read post]
10 May 2016, 9:12 am
Smith v. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 6:53 am
Kent v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 9:14 am
Merit Decision The issue in this case was whether or not the punitive damages cap codified in R.C. 2315.21(D)(2)(a) applied to the verdict. [read post]
