Search for: "S. R.C. T." Results 121 - 140 of 520
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 May 2014, 1:10 pm by MBettman
At Oral Argument Vanzandt’s Argument The General Assembly has been clear and unambiguous in R.C. 2953.53(D) about when a sealed record of acquittal may be used. [read post]
25 Oct 2022, 5:21 am by Eugene Volokh
In this case, the court of appeals relied on R.C. 149.43(A)(2)(a), which exempts law-enforcement records the release of which has a high probability of disclosing "[t]he identity of a suspect who has not been charged with the offense to which the record pertains. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 6:35 am by MBettman
Capital Care filed an administrative appeal to the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, which reversed the license revocation, finding R.C. 3702.303(A), R.C. 3702.304, and R.C. 3727. 60(B) unconstitutional and the revocation contrary to law. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 6:32 am by MBettman
Bartholomew, 2008-Ohio-4080 (“[T]he purpose of R.C. 2929.18(A)(1) is to require the offender to reimburse the victim — or whatever entity paid the victim — for the economic loss caused by the crime. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 9:55 am
  Particularly with respect to contact that doesn't have a functional sexual purpose. [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 12:21 pm by MBettman
[T]his court enunciated the policy that the exclusionary rule would not be applied to statutory violations falling short of constitutional violations, absent a legislative mandate requiring the application of the exclusionary rule. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 1:33 pm by Mark A. Eskenazi
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 in… [read post]
13 May 2016, 6:22 am by MBettman
Statutory Interpretation R.C. 4141.282 (C) doesn’t need any interpretation, writes Justice French, because it is plain and unambiguous. [read post]
16 May 2018, 7:16 am by MBettman
Furthermore, since this appeal arose from a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, “[t]he allegations must be accepted as true and all reasonable inferences in the [Investors’] favor. [read post]
23 Jul 2011, 4:50 pm by Eugene Volokh
Still, until the General Assembly specifically excludes an R.C. 2925.11 minor misdemeanor marijuana possession conviction from the purview of R.C. 2923.13(A)(3) or R.C. 2925.01(G)(1), it will remain a “drug abuse offense” and consequently a “disability” for purposes of R.C. 2923.13(A)(3).But nothing in the Stone court’s analysis actually dealt with Stone’s argument that § 2923.13 violates the Second… [read post]
14 May 2012, 10:19 am by David Lindner
The trial court awarded damages of $800 to the tenants due to the landlord’s terminating the water in breach of R.C. 5321.15. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 4:15 am by Jon Hyman
I know this isn’t clear guidance, but, much like how Justice Potter Stewart years ago famously defined obscenity, I think you know an employee when you see one. [read post]