Daily Case Update Archive

As a service to our members, we monitor opinions issued from the Ohio Supreme Court, the Ohio State First District Court of Appeals, and the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.  You can read the latest summaries or archived summaries from 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 , 2009 , 2010.

If you would like to receive a daily e-mail with same-day case updates, please join our Subscribers-Only discussion list.  Not a subscriber?  Join today!

February 24, 2005

Today's topics:   § 1983, First Amendment, mandamus, Ohio Public Records Act, Telecommunications Act of 1996, search and seizure:  "consent once removed"

Ohio Supreme Court | Ohio First District | U.S. 6th Circuit - Ohio | U.S. 6th Circuit - Other States

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Morrow County Prosecutor's Office, et al. (February 24, 2005)
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2005/2005-ohio-685.pdf (Cite as 2005 Ohio 685)
** NOT FINAL **  The Dispatch sought a 911 call related to a murder from the Morrow County Prosecutor's office.  The prosecutor's office offered to transcribe it, and let them listen to it, but would not make a copy.  The Dispatch sought a writ of mandamus under the Ohio Public Records Act (ORC § 149.43) for an audiotape copy, as well as fees.  Granted.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]

No opinions.
 

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals:  Ohio Cases

No opinions.
 

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Other States Cases

Prime Media v. City of Brentwood (February 24, 2005) (Appeal from M.D. Tenn.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0093p-06.pdf
Brentwood (TN) passed an ordinance restricting outdoor billboard sign size and location and Prime Media sued.  The district court invalidated the ordinance.  Reversed, because ordinance was content-neutral on time, manner, and place of speech and Brentwood met intermediate scrutiny test.

Tennessee ex rel. Wireless Income Properties  v. Chattanooga (February 24, 2005) (Appeal from E.D. Tenn.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0091p-06.pdf
Wireless sought permits to build wireless towers in Chattanooga and, after applying, Chattanooga placed a moratorium on building, and issued new zoning ordinances.  Wireless' applications didn't comply and the permits were denied.  Both sides filed motions for summary judgment and both were granted in part and declined in part, with Chattanooga given 60 days to act on Wireless' pending applications.  Reversed and remanded, finding that § 1983 was a suitable remedy for a violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, that the 60 day order was inappropriate and injunctive relief should have been granted.

United States v. Yoon (February 24, 2005) (Appeal from M.D. Tenn.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0092p-06.pdf
Yoon was visited by an informant with a wire, asking about marijuana.  During a conversation with the informant, federal officers raided Yoon's apartment and seized both marijuana and cocaine.  Yoon moved to suppress the evidence.  The district court denied.  Affirmed, that "consent once removed" doctrine applied and established.

Daily Case Updates