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 or 2006.

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

March 14, 2007

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

TOPICS:
- Workers' compensation
- Final appealable order
- Attorneys * Misconduct
- Lack of jurisdiction
- Availability of Public Records
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
- Sentencing
- Sexually-oriented offender classification
- Postconviction petition
- Post-release control
- Federal-Law Claims
- EEO complaint - retaliation
 

Ohio Supreme Court

 

State ex rel. Tussing v. Indus. Comm. (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-804)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-804.pdf
-  Workers' compensation * Court of appeals' judgment affirmed.
 
State ex rel. Oliver v. USA Waste of Ohio, Inc. (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-805)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-805.pdf
-  Workers' compensation * Court of appeals' judgment affirmed.
 
State ex rel. Stamm v. Harm & Ring Mechanical, Inc. (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-806)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-806.pdf
-  Workers' compensation * Court of appeals' judgment affirmed.
 
State ex rel. Domico v. Indus. Comm. (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-807)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-807.pdf
-  Workers' compensation * Court of appeals' judgment affirmed.
 
Filippi v. Ahmed  (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-808)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-808.pdf
-  Final appealable order * Intervention by insurance company * Court of appeals' judgment reversed on the authority of Gehm v. Timberline Post & Frame.
 
Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Kehn  (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-809)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-809.pdf
-  Attorneys * Misconduct * Failure to cooperate in a disciplinary investigation * Conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law * Six-month suspension stayed on condition.
 
Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Griffin   (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-810)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-810.pdf
-  Attorney misconduct * Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice * Conduct that adversely reflects on lawyer's fitness to practice law * Prior disciplinary offenses * Two-year suspension.
 
State ex rel. Beane v. Dayton (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-811)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-811.pdf
-  Original actions * Mandamus * Complaint seeks prohibitory injunction to enjoin enforcement of R.C. 9.481 * Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction in injunction * Cause dismissed.
 
Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Herron (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-812)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-812.pdf
-  Attorneys at law*Misconduct*Commingling*Failure to keep record of client's funds*Failure to promptly pay funds to client*Failure to cooperate in disciplinary proceeding*Indefinite suspension.
 
State ex rel. Russell v. Bican (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-813)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-813.pdf
-  R.C. 149.43(B)(4) * Court of appeals judgment dismissing public-records mandamus case affirmed.
 
State ex rel. Turner v. Houk (March 14, 2007) (2007-Ohio-814)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-814.pdf
-  Mandamus sought to compel Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction and the warden of the Ohio State Penitentiary in Youngstown to reinstate classified employee to his previous classified position in accordance with the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act * Cause dismissed, as relator had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law by way of civil-service appeal.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]
 

*** Judgment Entries ***
 
State v. Lewis (March 14, 2007)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060008;%20C-060009.pdf
-  In these two appeals, defendant-appellant Larry Lewis, Jr., challenges the prospective application of the State v. Foster2 sentencing scheme to sentences imposed in two criminal prosecutions. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
In Re:  Owens (March 14, 2007)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060069.pdf
-  Claude Owens appeals from the trial court's judgment classifying him as a sexually-oriented offender and ordering him to register with the Hamilton County Sheriff's office for ten years from the date of his classification. In this case, the trial court followed the law by ordering Owens to register in Ohio for a period of ten years.2 There was no error. But neither this judgment entry nor the trial court's order precludes Owens from now applying to the sheriff for credit under R.C. 2950.08(E). Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State v. Scruggs (March 14, 2007)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060160.pdf
-  Petitioner-appellant Henry Scruggs appeals from the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court's judgment dismissing his petition for postconviction relief. Because the entry from which Scruggs appeals is not a final appealable order, we dismiss his appeal. The entry from which Scruggs appeals, titled "Entry Overruling Motion Post-Conviction Petition to Vacate," states only that "[t]he Court, being fully advised and after due consideration, finds the said motion not well-taken, and hereby overrules the same." The court did not make and file findings of fact and conclusions of law. Nor does the court's entry otherwise apprise Scruggs of the basis for the court's decision or facilitate meaningful appellate review. Therefore, the entry is not a final appealable order. Accordingly, we dismiss Scruggs's appeal.
 
State v. Etzwiler (March 14, 2007)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060251.pdf
-  Russell Etzwiler appeals his conviction for three counts of burglary. Because he was not informed about post-release control, we must vacate his sentences and remand the case for resentencing. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
   

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

 

No Opinions.
 

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

 

Boykin v. Van Buren Township (March 14, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0098p-06.pdf
-  Plaintiff Jeffrey Boykin appeals from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants, alleging a violation of his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and various state-law claims. Boykin was thought by private security guards at a Meijer store to have shoplifted a drill that was on sale for five dollars. As it turns out, the guards were mistaken; he had paid in full for the drill. Nevertheless, a call was placed to the Van Buren Township Police Department, two of whose officers tracked Boykin down, arrested him at his home, and hauled him in a squad car back to the Meijer store. Only after Boykin had suffered this indignity did one of the Meijer guards finally talk to the cashier who had rung Boykin up and check the receipts, at which point it became evident that they had been in error. Boykin was then released from custody, with apologies. All this over a five dollar drill.
 
Dixon v. Gonzales, et al (March 14, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0099p-06.pdf
-  Plaintiff-Appellant James Dixon, Jr. ("Dixon") appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment for Defendant-Appellee Alberto Gonzales, sued in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States and Defendant-Appellee Robert S. Mueller, III, sued in his official capacity as the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") (collectively, the "Attorney General"). Dixon alleges that he was denied reinstatement as a Special Agent with the FBI as a result of unlawful retaliation by a former supervisor, about whose racially discriminatory conduct Dixon had previously complained. After this Court reversed and remanded the district court's initial order dismissing the case, Dixon v. Ashcroft, 392 F.3d 212 (6th Cir. 2004) ("Dixon I"), the Attorney General brought a second motion for summary judgment arguing that Dixon had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and that Dixon had failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation. The district court rejected the Attorney General's failure-to-exhaust argument but granted summary judgment on the grounds that Dixon did not establish a prima facie case. For the reasons set forth herein, we AFFIRM the district court's judgment.
 

Daily Case Updates