burden to prove defense in Ohio

2013No. 2001-L-001, 2001-Ohio-8733 , citing Bean v. Bean (1983), 14 Ohio App.3d 358 , 363 * * *. ‘The party raising the affirmative defense has the burden to prove that defense.’ Bertolone, at P3. * * * {¶15} “Also, ‘* * * a person charged with contempt for the violation of a court order may defend by proving that it was not in his power to obey the order.’ Courtney v. Courtney (1984), 16 Ohio App.3d 329 , 334 * * *.” Nolan at ¶29-32 . {¶16} Accordingly, Philip, as the moving party, had the burden of establishing a breach of Jennifer’s obligations by clear and convincing evidence.

2008(Citations omitted.) *Page 8 {¶ 32} Also, "* * * a person charged with contempt for the violation of a court order may defend by proving that it was not in his power to obey the order." Courtney v. Courtney (1984), 16 Ohio App.3d 329 , 334 . {¶ 33} In the case at bar, appellant raised his impossibility to perform and/or his inability to comply as an affirmative defense.

2019Bergman at ¶ 31 , citing Peck v. Peck, 96 Ohio App.3d 731, 734 , 645 N.E.2d 1300 (12th Dist.1994); Snyder v. Snyder, 2d Dist.

2019Bergman at ¶ 31 , citing Peck v. Peck, 96 Ohio App.3d 731, 734 , 645 N.E.2d 1300 (12th Dist.1994); Snyder v. Snyder, 2d Dist.

2020Greene No. 2019-CA-62, 2020-Ohio-3299, ¶ 11 . {¶ 15} The trial court here determined that the settlement proceeds were Diana’s separate property as compensation for her “physical injury” solely because the settlement agreement stated that the settlement was to resolve a case involving Diana’s “physical sickness.” The court refused to consider any other evidence, citing contract law that provides that if the language of a contract is plain and unambiguous, a court cannot consider extrinsic evidence.

2018The court specifically instructed the jury that the state had the burden to prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt: "The defendant must be acquitted of an offense unless the State produces evidence which convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt of every essential element of the offense." The court further instructed, "Before you can find the defendant guilty of felonious assault, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that * * * the defendant knowingly caused serious physical harm to [the victim]." {¶ 43} The trial court also instructed the jury, "If the defendant fails to establish the

2018The court specifically instructed the jury that the state had the burden to prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt: "The defendant must be acquitted of an offense unless the State produces evidence which convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt of every essential element of the offense." The court further instructed, "Before you can find the defendant guilty of felonious assault, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that * * * the defendant knowingly caused serious physical harm to [the victim]." {¶ 43} The trial court also instructed the jury, "If the defendant fails to establish the

2013No. 2001-L-001, 2001-Ohio-8733 , citing Bean v. Bean (1983), 14 Ohio App.3d 358 , 363 * * *. ‘The party raising the affirmative defense has the burden to prove that defense.’ Bertolone, at P3. * * * {¶15} “Also, ‘* * * a person charged with contempt for the violation of a court order may defend by proving that it was not in his power to obey the order.’ Courtney v. Courtney (1984), 16 Ohio App.3d 329 , 334 * * *.” Nolan at ¶29-32 . {¶16} Accordingly, Philip, as the moving party, had the burden of establishing a breach of Jennifer’s obligations by clear and convincing evidence.

2012Citing Ohio Bell, the city alleged that it was “not Reynoldsburg’s burden to demonstrate to the Commission that CSP could have placed its facilities in private easements; the burden to prove that defense is on CSP.” The arguments set forth in the city’s brief, however, are not found anywhere in its application for rehearing. {¶ 61} “[W]hen an appellant’s grounds for rehearing fail to specifically allege in what respect the PUCO’s order was unreasonable or unlawful, the requirements of R.C. 4903.10 have not been met.” Discount Cellular, 112 Ohio St.3d 360 , 2007-Ohio-53 , 859 N.E.2d 957 , ¶ 59

2001Vilseck v. Vilseck (Dec. 31, 1996), Ashtabula App. No. 96-A-0003, unreported, 1996 Ohio App. LEXIS 5937 , at *14, citing Olmsted Twp. v. Riolo (1988), 49 Ohio App.3d 114 and Courtney v. Courtney (1984), 16 Ohio App.3d 329 .