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!

May 9, 2007

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

TOPICS:
- Common-law writs
- Attorney misconduct
- Habeas corpus
- Complaint for a writ of prohibition
- Workers’ compensation
- Sentencing - mandatory provisions
- Arbitration * Collective bargaining
- Taxation * Real property valuation
- Arbitration agreements
- Governmental immunity
- Jury Verdict - Real Property
- Noncompete Agreement - Trade Secrets
- Sexual Predator Classification
- Re-sentencing - Post-release control
- Jury Instructions
- Breach of fiduciary duty
- Expungement - first time offender
- Evidence - testimony

Ohio Supreme Court: Perotti v. Stine (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1957)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1957.pdf
- Common-law writs * Inmate in federal penitentiary * State court jurisdiction.

Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Scott-Chestang (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1956)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1956.pdf
- Attorney misconduct * Indefinite suspension to run concurrently with sanction imposed in previous case.

Wells v. Hudson (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1955)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1955.pdf
- Habeas corpus * Res judicata.

State ex rel. Ketterer v. Oney (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1954)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1954.pdf
- Complaint for a writ of prohibition seeking to prevent a single judge from deciding a postconviction-relief petition when the relator was sentenced to death by a three-judge panel * Court of appeals’ judgment dismissing the complaint affirmed.

Core Funding Group, L.L.C. v. McDonald (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1953)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1953.pdf
- Appeal dismissed as improvidently accepted.

State ex rel. OmniSource Corp. v. Indus. Comm. (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1951)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1951.pdf
- Workers’ compensation * Compensation for temporary total disability * Eligibility continues despite discharge for reasons unrelated to disability.

State v. Taylor (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1950)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1950.pdf
- Criminal law * Possession of illegal drugs * R.C. 2925.11 * Attempt * R.C. 2923.02 * Attempted possession of illegal drugs is a drug-abuse offense under R.C. 2925.01(G)(4) and is therefore subject to mandatory sentencing provisions of R.C. 2925.01.

Summit Cty. Children Servs. Bd. v. Communication Workers of Am., Local 4546 (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1949)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1949.pdf
- Arbitration * Collective bargaining * “Good cause” for discipline * Arbitrator’s construction of undefined term.

Dayton-Montgomery Cty. Port Auth. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1948)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1948.pdf
- Taxation * Real property valuation * Board of Tax Appeals improperly adopted a grade-factor adjustment in its valuation of property when no evidence was offered in support of that factor.

Ignazio v. Clear Channel Broadcasting, Inc. (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1947)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1947.pdf
- Arbitration agreements * Severability * Judicial review * Waiver.

Cramer v. Auglaize (May 9, 2007) (2007-Ohio-1946)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2007/2007-ohio-1946.pdf
- Acres Governmental immunity * Former R.C. 3721.17(I)(a) specifically abrogates governmental immunity and grants a cause of action to residents of unlicensed county nursing homes against a political subdivision for violations of R.C. 3721.10 through 3721.17, the Ohio Nursing Home Patients’ Bill of Rights.
First District Court of Appeals: [Search Other Ohio Districts]; *** Judgment Entries ***

Board of Commissioners of Hamilton, Ohio v. Roudebush (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050872_05092007.pdf
- Plaintiff-appellee the Board of County Commissioners of Hamilton County, Ohio, brought an appropriation action against Nancy Roudebush Whitney, Constance Roudebush Loftus, and defendant-appellant Thomas R. Roudebush, to acquire approximately twenty unimproved acres of their property for the modification of an interchange for Interstate 74. The jury returned a verdict for the property owners in the amount of $198,617.47. Roudebush argues that the trial court erred in entering judgment on the jury’s verdict because the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, was not supported by credible and competent evidence, and did not provide just compensation. Judgment AFFIRMED.

Acordia of Ohio, LLC. v. Fishel, et al. (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060292_05092007.pdf
- Plaintiff-appellant, Acordia of Ohio, LLC (“Acordia”), an insurance agency, sought damages and injunctive relief against four of its former employees. Acordia alleged various causes of action including breach of a noncompete agreement and misappropriation of trade secrets. Acordia now argues that the trial court erred by denying its request for a preliminary injunction. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Cole (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060297_05092007.pdf
- Cole was convicted of rape and three counts of gross sexual imposition. Cole was returned to Hamilton County for a sexual-offender classification hearing and was classified as a sexual predator. Cole argues that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the sexual-predator proceeding because Revised Code Chapter 2950 is unconstitutional. Cole argues that the trial court erred in finding him to be a sexual predator. Judgment AFFFIRMED.

State v. Jordan (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060407_05092007.pdf
- Jordan pled guilty to possession of cocaine, a second-degree felony. He was sentenced before July 11, 2006. And he was sentenced on a second-degree felony, which, under R.C. 2929.19(B)(3)(c), included a mandatory period of post-release control. The trial court conducted a hearing in compliance with this provision, and it properly corrected Jordan’s judgment of conviction to reflect the mandatory period of post-release control. Jordan now appeals, arguing in his sole assignment of error that his sentence was contrary to law. Because Jordan was still serving his sentence, the trial court was permitted to resentence him to include the necessary period of post-release control. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Bailey (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060445_05092007.pdf
- Bailey was sentenced to a total of ten years' imprisonment for aggravated robbery, carrying a concealed weapon, having a weapon under a disability, and a firearm specification. Bailey appealed, and while the appeal was pending, the Supreme Court of Ohio invalidated a large portion of the state’s sentencing statutes in State v. Foster. This court remanded the cause for resentencing in light of Foster, and on remand the trial court again imposed the aggregate ten-year sentence. He contends that the trial court was required to sentence him under the pre-Foster sentencing scheme and that its failure to do so violated the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Byrd (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060470_05092007.pdf
- Byrd appeals the sentence imposed by the trial court after this court remanded his case for resentencing consistent with State v. Foster. Byrd was found guilty by a jury of “one count of aggravated robbery by a police officer, in violation of R.C. 2911.01(B), and one count of assault of a peace officer, in violation of R.C. 2913.13(A).” Following our remand, the trial court held a sentencing hearing where it imposed a nine-year prison term for the aggravated robbery to be served consecutively to the one-year prison term for the assault. Byrd again appeals, raising six assignments of error. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Womack (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060542_05092007.pdf
- Womack was indicted on four counts of aggravated robbery under R.C. 2911.01(A)(1), felonies of the first degree. Following a jury trial, he was found not guilty of these counts. But the jury had also been given an instruction on robbery as a lesser-included offense under R.C. 2911.02(A)(3). Womack was found guilty of robbery on all counts. He received an aggregate sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment. Womack argues that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the offense of robbery. Womack argues that the instruction was inappropriate because robbery was not a lesser-included offense of aggravated robbery, the indicted offense. Judgment AFFIRMED.

Jackson v. Richardson (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060613_05092007.pdf
- Jackson and defendant-appellee Shelina Richardson are sisters. Richardson had a general power of attorney for Jackson, a paranoid schizophrenic. Following the death of their mother, both Jackson and Richardson received approximately $18,000 in life insurance proceeds from their mother’s policy. Jackson sued Richardson for conversion and breach of fiduciary duty, alleging that Richardson had utilized the power of attorney to spend Jackson’s inheritance for her own benefit. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Ostenkamp (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060624_05092007.pdf
- Ostenkamp pleaded guilty to eight counts of rape and eleven counts of pandering sexually oriented materials involving a minor, felonies of the first and second degree, respectively. Ostenkamp appeals the trial court’s sentence and its judgment denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Gresham (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060665_05092007.pdf
- Gresham was convicted of child endangering, a second-degree felony, in violation of R.C. 2919.22(B)(3). Gresham was sentenced to eight years in prison. The sentence, however, did not contain a post-release-control sanction, imposed either orally or in the court’s journalized judgment. The trial court subsequently ordered that Gresham, who was still serving his prison sentence, be returned to the trial court for resentencing. The trial court sentenced Gresham to the same eight-year prison term that it had originally imposed, as well as to a three-year term of post-release control. Gresham now appeals, raising three assignments of error. Judgment AFFIRMED.

State v. Helton (May 9, 2007)
- http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-060721_05092007.pdf
- The state of Ohio appeals from the trial court’s judgment ordering Randy Helton’s 1991 theft conviction sealed. In one assignment of error, the state contends that the trial court’s judgment must be reversed because Helton was not a “first time offender.” The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and this cause is remanded for the entry of an order denying Helton’s application for expungement.
U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Ohio Cases: No Opinions.
U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Other States Cases: USA v. Safa (May 9, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich)
- http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0167p-06.pdf
- The defendant, Steve Safa, was found guilty by a jury on one count of making a false declaration before a grand jury and was sentenced to serve 15 months in prison and pay a fine of $10,000. On appeal, the defendant contends that the district court admitted into evidence improper lay opinion testimony and failed to consider the necessary factors in imposing sentence. For the reasons set out below, we find no reversible error and affirm the judgment of the district court in its entirety.

Law Blog

Daily Case Updates