Search for: "In re R.C."
Results 81 - 100
of 302
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Apr 2010, 5:39 pm
They assert that interpreting the law to require an entire new hearing at which the same criteria are applied to make exactly the same legal determination would be redundant and wasteful of judicial resources, and also contrary to the doctrine of res judicata (that issues decided by a court and not appealed should not later be relitigated). [read post]
26 Dec 2018, 6:25 am
For sentences entered prior to that date, however, an offender may seek a waiver of costs only at sentencing, the trial court lacks jurisdiction to reconsider its own final order, and any subsequent collateral attack on that order in either the trial or appellate court is barred by res judicata. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 10:51 am
He was also charged with “menacing” (R.C. 2903.21(A)) and “inducing panic” (R.C. 2917.31(A)(3)). [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 9:53 am
RE/MAX FIRST CHOICE, LLC, et al., Defendants. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 5:07 am
” … Alexander cited R.C. 1702.80(D) in support of his public policy argument. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 6:42 am
”) In re K.M., 2012-Ohio-6266(5th Dist.) [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 8:23 am
But R.C. 2929.13(F) does not define “convicted. [read post]
12 Oct 2016, 6:59 am
Ohio’s DNA testing statutes enacted in 2003 opened the door for the re-testing of DNA with improved technology. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 8:05 am
In July of 2010, a statewide labor union, the Ohio Democratic Party, and several Democratic candidates for election or re-election to judgeships filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Cincinnati alleging that R.C. 3505.04 violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to freedom of expression and association. [read post]
21 Aug 2018, 6:32 am
R.C. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 9:48 am
”) In re M.A., 2016-Ohio-1161 (11th Dist.) [read post]
23 Jun 2015, 12:29 pm
Three immigration concepts are mentioned in R.C. 2943.031: “naturalization,” “exclusion from admission” (now called “admissibility” or “admission”), and deportation (now called removal). [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 9:38 am
Chief Justice O’Connor harshly disagreed with Kennedy’s interpretation of R.C. 2953.21(A)(1). [read post]
21 Jul 2016, 11:39 am
R.C. 2953.73(E)(1) does not. [read post]
1 May 2013, 4:34 am
In fact, R.C. 4112.99, which provides the most expansive remedies, has no exhaustion requirement at all. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 3:24 am
See .R.C. [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
Once the safety bumper has collapsed, the car cannot operate until the bumper is reopened, the circuit is completed, and the system has been manually re-set. [read post]
14 Feb 2008, 1:36 pm
We’re left to wonder how that would have effected the outcome.) [read post]
16 Dec 2019, 5:31 am
That is consistent with the language in R.C. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 12:00 am
In re Civil Commitment of G.X.R., No. [read post]
