21 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Donnell v. Parkcliffe Alzheimer's Communitygreen2 sentences2025Hicks contends that LGM did not initially file a motion stay pending arbitration until after it extensively participated in filing motions, answering complaints, and participating in the proceedings for more than two years from the date of service. {¶32} “‘The right to arbitration may be waived just like any other contractual right.’” Blue Technologies Smart Sols, L.L.C. v. Ohio Collaborative Learning Solutions, Inc., 2020-Ohio-806 , ¶ 13 (8th Dist.), quoting Aljaberi v. Neurocare Ctr., Inc., 2019-Ohio-2181, ¶ 22 (5th Dist.). “‘To establish waiver, the party seeking waiver must demonstrate (1) 2020Wood No. WD-17-001, 2017-Ohio-7982, ¶ 21 ; and Atkinson v. Dick Masheter Leasing II, Inc., 10th Dist. | 1 | 3 |
Boewe v. Ford Motor Co.green2 sentences2023Boewe v. Ford Motor Co., 94 Ohio App.3d 270, 278-279 (8th Dist.1992). {¶21} Under Civ.R. 49(B), if there is an inconsistency between the general verdict and one or more interrogatory answers, then the trial court “may” do one of three things: (1) enter judgment in accordance with the interrogatory answers, notwithstanding the general verdict, (2) return the jury for further consideration of the interrogatories and the general verdict, or (3) order a new trial. 2002Boewe v. Ford Motor Co . (1992), 94 Ohio App.3d 270 , 278-279 . | 1 | 2 |
Aljaberi v. Neurocare Ctr., Inc.green2 sentences2025Hicks contends that LGM did not initially file a motion stay pending arbitration until after it extensively participated in filing motions, answering complaints, and participating in the proceedings for more than two years from the date of service. {¶32} “‘The right to arbitration may be waived just like any other contractual right.’” Blue Technologies Smart Sols, L.L.C. v. Ohio Collaborative Learning Solutions, Inc., 2020-Ohio-806 , ¶ 13 (8th Dist.), quoting Aljaberi v. Neurocare Ctr., Inc., 2019-Ohio-2181, ¶ 22 (5th Dist.). “‘To establish waiver, the party seeking waiver must demonstrate (1) 2025Hicks contends that LGM did not initially file a motion stay pending arbitration until after it extensively participated in filing motions, answering complaints, and participating in the proceedings for more than two years from the date of service. {¶32} “‘The right to arbitration may be waived just like any other contractual right.’” Blue Technologies Smart Sols, L.L.C. v. Ohio Collaborative Learning Solutions, Inc., 2020-Ohio-806 , ¶ 13 (8th Dist.), quoting Aljaberi v. Neurocare Ctr., Inc., 2019-Ohio-2181, ¶ 22 (5th Dist.). “‘To establish waiver, the party seeking waiver must demonstrate (1) | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. JC Austintown, Inc.green1 sentence2024Brown v. JC Austintown, Inc., 2023-Ohio-553, ¶ 22 (7th Dist.), citing Gembarski v. Partssource, Inc., 2019-Ohio-3231, ¶ 25 . {¶29} This Court has set out the relevant law to apply when considering whether a party has waived its right to arbitrate: As a general rule, either party to a contract of arbitration may waive the contractual right to arbitrate. | 1 | 1 |
Blakemore v. Blakemoregreen1 sentence2024Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219 (1983). {¶28} To establish waiver of the right to arbitrate, the party seeking waiver has the burden to demonstrate the other party knew of its right to assert the arbitration agreement and the totality of the circumstances establish the other party acted inconsistently with that right. | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Cleveland Clinicgreen2 sentences2013Stated another way, the party seeking privilege is required to show that each of the documents over which it asserts the privilege is a “record within the scope of a peer review committee.” Smith v. Cleveland Clinic, 197 Ohio App.3d 524 , 2011-Ohio-6648 , 968 N.E.2d 41, ¶ 15 (8th Dist.). 2013Stated another way, the party seeking privilege is required to show that each of the documents over which it asserts the privilege is a “record within the scope of a peer review committee.” Smith v. Cleveland Clinic, 197 Ohio App.3d 524 , 2011-Ohio-6648 , 968 N.E.2d 41, ¶ 15 (8th Dist.). | 1 | 1 |
Maryhew v. Yovagreen1 sentence2007See Maryhew , 11 Ohio St.3d at 156-159 (finding that defendant had not submitted to the court's jurisdiction, which would have waived the issue of lack of personal jurisdiction), and Mortgage Lenders Network USA, Inc. v. Riggin , Summit App. No. 22901, 2006-Ohio-3292 (trial court acquired personal jurisdiction over appellant when she made a voluntary appearance in the matter). *Page 5 {¶ 18} A party seeking to challenge a void judgment must file a motion to vacate or set aside the judgment. | 1 | 1 |
Mtge. Lenders Network USA, Inc. v. Riggins, Unpublished Decision (6-28-2006)green1 sentence2007See Maryhew , 11 Ohio St.3d at 156-159 (finding that defendant had not submitted to the court's jurisdiction, which would have waived the issue of lack of personal jurisdiction), and Mortgage Lenders Network USA, Inc. v. Riggin , Summit App. No. 22901, 2006-Ohio-3292 (trial court acquired personal jurisdiction over appellant when she made a voluntary appearance in the matter). *Page 5 {¶ 18} A party seeking to challenge a void judgment must file a motion to vacate or set aside the judgment. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gembarski v. PartsSource, Inc. (Slip Opinion)
green
2 sentences2026(Emphasis added.) “The right to arbitration may be waived just like any other contractual right.” (Cleaned up.) Blue Technologies Smart Solutions, L.L.C. v. Ohio Collaborative Learning Solutions, Inc., 2020-Ohio-806 , ¶ 13 (8th Dist.). “‘To establish waiver, the party seeking waiver must demonstrate (1) that the party knew of its right to assert an argument or defense and (2) that the totality of the circumstances establish that the party acted inconsistently with that right.’” Id., quoting Gembarski v. PartsSource, Inc., 2019-Ohio-3231, ¶ 25 . 2025Hicks contends that LGM did not initially file a motion stay pending arbitration until after it extensively participated in filing motions, answering complaints, and participating in the proceedings for more than two years from the date of service. {¶32} “‘The right to arbitration may be waived just like any other contractual right.’” Blue Technologies Smart Sols, L.L.C. v. Ohio Collaborative Learning Solutions, Inc., 2020-Ohio-806 , ¶ 13 (8th Dist.), quoting Aljaberi v. Neurocare Ctr., Inc., 2019-Ohio-2181, ¶ 22 (5th Dist.). “‘To establish waiver, the party seeking waiver must demonstrate (1) | 7 | 2019–2026 |
Mentor-On-The-Lake v. Giffin
green
2 sentences2003R. 614.” Mentor-on-the-Lake v. Giffin (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 441, 448 , 664 N.E.2d 557 . 2003R. 614.” Mentor-on-the-Lake v. Giffin (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 441, 448 , 664 N.E.2d 557 . | 3 | 2003–2003 |
Compuserve, Inc. v. Trionfo
green
2 sentences2013CompuServe, Inc. v. Trionfo, 91 Ohio App.3d 157, 161 , 631 N.E.2d 1120 (10th Dist. 1993). 2013CompuServe, Inc. v. Trionfo, 91 Ohio App.3d 157, 161 , 631 N.E.2d 1120 (10th Dist. 1993). | 2 | 2007–2013 |
In Re Miller
green
2 sentences1993In re Miller (1986), 33 Ohio App.3d 224 , 515 N.E.2d 635 ; Security Ins. 1993In re Miller (1986), 33 Ohio App.3d 224 , 515 N.E.2d 635 ; Security Ins. | 2 | 1990–1993 |
Large v. Heartland-Lansing of Bridgeport Ohio, L.L.C.
green
1 sentence2013Belmont No. 12 BE 7, 2013-Ohio-2877, ¶ 44 . {¶28} Based on this, the party seeking privilege must begin with establishing that a peer review committee was in existence and that the facility actually investigated the incident or incidents that the disputed documents or information reference. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Schwaller v. Maguire, Unpublished Decision (12-19-2003)
green
1 sentence2004However, before a trial court will consider such an instruction, the party seeking the instruction must make "a strong showing of malfeasance — or at least gross neglect * * *." Schwaller, supra, at ¶ 24 ; Brokamp, supra, at 870 ; Vernardakis, supra. {¶ 89} Further, in order to sanction a party with an adverse instruction, the trial court must determine that the spoliation of the evidence was prejudicial to the party seeking the instruction. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Bright v. Ford Motor Co.
green
1 sentence2004Bright v. Ford Motor Co. (1990), 63 Ohio App.3d 256 , 260 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Brokamp v. Mercy Hospital Anderson
green
1 sentence2004However, before a trial court will consider such an instruction, the party seeking the instruction must make "a strong showing of malfeasance — or at least gross neglect * * *." Schwaller, supra, at ¶ 24 ; Brokamp, supra, at 870 ; Vernardakis, supra. {¶ 89} Further, in order to sanction a party with an adverse instruction, the trial court must determine that the spoliation of the evidence was prejudicial to the party seeking the instruction. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Rudy v. Loral Defense Systems
green
1 sentence2000Rudy v. Loral Defense Sys. (1993), 85 Ohio App.3d 148 , 154 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Maloney v. Patterson
green
1 sentence1999Maloney , supra , at 410. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Ohio Ass'n of Public School Employees v. Dayton City School District Board of Education
green
1 sentence1992Finally, this court’s holding in Chapter 643, AFSCME, supra, demonstrates that there is no adequate remedy at law for a party seeking to challenge an order by SERB dismissing an unfair labor practice charge for lack of probable cause. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Security Insurance v. Regional Transit Authority
green
1 sentence1990In Re Miller (1986), 33 Ohio App. 3d 224 ; Security Insurance Co. v. Regional Transit Authority (1982), 4 Ohio App. 3d 24 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.