State ex rel. Corona v. Harris, 406 N.E.2d 1120 (Ohio 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
State ex rel. Corona v. Harris, 406 N.E.2d 1120 (Ohio 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
32 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Reynolds v. Spicer (ohioctapp, 2006-04-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982 2004 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Reynolds v. Spicer
Ohio Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Pasqualone v. Pasqualone (1980), 63 Ohio St.2d 96 , 17 O.O.3d 58 , 406 N.E.2d 1121 .
discussed Cited "see" Prusia v. Prusia, Unpublished Decision (4-18-2003)
Ohio Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Pasqualone v. Pasqualone (1980), 63 Ohio St.2d 96 , 17 O.O.3d 58 , 406 N.E.2d 1121 ." Bechtol v. Bechtol (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 21 , 23 . {¶ 20} Caroline is not claiming the custody determination is unsupported by credible evidence; she is complaining that the record does not show that she was willful and vindictive.
discussed Cited "see" Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Borchers
Ohio Ct. App. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See Pasqualone v. Pasqualone (1980), 63 Ohio St. 2d 96 [ 17 O.O.3d 58 ], citing In re Corey (1945), 145 Ohio St. 413 , the second paragraph of the syllabus of which reads, as follows: “Parents are the legal and natural custodians of their minor children, and each parent has an equal right to such custody in the absence of an order, judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction fixing their custody.” Accordingly, the words “parents having the custody and control of a minor,” as used in R.C. 3109.09, refer to both parents of the child, whether or not divorced, at least in the a…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The State, ex rel. Corona
v.
Harris, Judge
No. 80-186.
Ohio Supreme Court.
Jul 9, 1980.
406 N.E.2d 1120
Mr. Paul Mancino, Jr., for appellant., Mr. John T. Corrigan, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. George J. Sadd, for appellee.
Brown, Celebrezze, Herbert, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

App. R. 9(C) provides for narrative statements only “[i]f no report of the evidence or proceedings at a hearing or trial was made, or if a transcript is unavailable* * *.”

Appellant’s complaint does not allege that a verbatim statement of the Juvenile Court proceedings cannot be provided; and appellant concedes that if a verbatim statement exists, there is no need for a narrative statement.

Until it is clearly established that no verbatim transcript can be provided, appellee has no clear legal duty to sign and settle the narrative statement.

For reason of the foregoing, the judgment of the Court of Appeals, dismissing the mandamus complaint, is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Celebrezze, C. J., Herbert, W. Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney, Locher and Holmes, JJ., concur.