Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 Ohio opinions name it 3 courts 1998–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lortz, 23762 (6-25-2008)green2 sentences2025“The cornerstone of the analysis is whether counsel’s deficient performance precluded the defendant from entering a guilty plea that was knowing and voluntary.” Id., citing State v. Atkinson, 2006- Ohio-5806, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). “[T]he Court need not address both Strickland prongs if an appellant fails to prove either one.” State v. Lortz, 2008-Ohio-3108, ¶ 34 (9th Dist.). {¶13} In analyzing Ms. Gray’s postconviction petition, a trial court must undertake a two- part inquiry to determine whether Ms. Gray, who brought forth evidence outside the record of ineffective assistance of counsel in the f 2025“The cornerstone of the analysis is whether counsel’s deficient performance precluded the defendant from entering a guilty plea that was knowing and voluntary.” Id., citing State v. Atkinson, 2006-Ohio-5806, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). “[T]he Court need not address both Strickland prongs if an appellant fails to prove either one.” State v. Lortz, 2008-Ohio-3108, ¶ 34 (9th Dist.). {¶28} Ms. Farakhan provides only her version of communications with trial counsel and has not provided an affidavit from trial counsel concerning what advice or information he gave her. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Atkinson, Unpublished Decision (11-6-2006)green2 sentences2025“The cornerstone of the analysis is whether counsel’s deficient performance precluded the defendant from entering a guilty plea that was knowing and voluntary.” Id., citing State v. Atkinson, 2006-Ohio-5806, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). “[T]he Court need not address both Strickland prongs if an appellant fails to prove either one.” State v. Lortz, 2008-Ohio-3108, ¶ 34 (9th Dist.). {¶28} Ms. Farakhan provides only her version of communications with trial counsel and has not provided an affidavit from trial counsel concerning what advice or information he gave her. 2025“The cornerstone of the analysis is whether counsel’s deficient performance precluded the defendant from entering a guilty plea that was knowing and voluntary.” Id., citing State v. Atkinson, 2006-Ohio-5806, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). 7 {¶13} Here, a review of the record indicates several reasons Mr. Walton-Kirkendoll’s arguments fail. | 2 | 2 |
Price v. Matco Tools, 23583 (9-28-2007)green2 sentences2016No. 23583, 2007-Ohio-5116, ¶ 31 . 2016“The Cornerstone of the analysis [whether there was discriminatory intent] is whether the employment action is the result of discrimination – not merely whether the action is unfair or the justification questionable.” Price v. Matco Tools, Inc., 2007-Ohio-5116, ¶ 31 (9th Dist.). {¶37} “The ultimate burden of persuading the trier of fact that the defendant intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff remains at all times with the plaintiff.” Vossman v. AirNet Sys., 10th Dist. | 1 | 3 |
Akron v. Hellergreen1 sentence2016See Heller, 2013-Ohio-5228, at ¶ 8 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hill v. Lockhart
green
2 sentences2025“The cornerstone of the analysis is whether counsel’s deficient performance precluded the defendant from entering a guilty plea that was knowing and voluntary.” Id., citing State v. Atkinson, 2006-Ohio-5806, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). “[T]he Court need not address both Strickland prongs if an appellant fails to prove either one.” State v. Lortz, 2008-Ohio-3108, ¶ 34 (9th Dist.). {¶28} Ms. Farakhan provides only her version of communications with trial counsel and has not provided an affidavit from trial counsel concerning what advice or information he gave her. 2025“The cornerstone of the analysis is whether counsel’s deficient performance precluded the defendant from entering a guilty plea that was knowing and voluntary.” Id., citing State v. Atkinson, 2006-Ohio-5806, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). 7 {¶13} Here, a review of the record indicates several reasons Mr. Walton-Kirkendoll’s arguments fail. | 3 | 2025–2025 |
East Ohio Gas Co. v. City of Akron
green
2 sentences1998IV The remaining cornerstone of the doctrine of implied preemption is this court’s stated “antipathy to ‘double taxation.’ ” East Ohio Gas at 77, 36 O.O.2d at 58 , 218 N.E.2d at 610 . 1998IV The remaining cornerstone of the doctrine of implied preemption is this court’s stated “antipathy to ‘double taxation.’ ” East Ohio Gas at 77, 36 O.O.2d at 58 , 218 N.E.2d at 610 . | 2 | 1998–1998 |
Vossman v. AirNet Sys.
green
1 sentence2016Franklin No. 12AP-971, 2013-Ohio-4675 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.