temporal requirement (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

temporal requirement in Ohio

9 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2022 1 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Continental Hydraulics Inc. v. Department of Employment & Economic Developmentgreen
minnctapp · 2013 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020See, e.g., Continental Hydraulics, Inc. v. Dept. of Emp. & Economic Dev., 832 N.W.2d 298, 301 (C.A.Minn.2013) (“Use of the present tense suggests a temporal requirement—that the common management or control must be concurrent”). 10 January Term, 2020 {¶ 27} The evidence is undisputed that at the time of the transfer (October 6, 2009), Old Delphi was a wholly owned subsidiary of Delphi Corporation, while New Delphi was owned, managed, and controlled entirely by the hedge funds.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Barrett v. Franklin green
ohioctapp · 1986
2 sentences

2016In so finding, we acknowledge language from Stegman indicating that “the ultimate burden of complying with the temporal requirement of Civ.R. 25(A) rests with the party who brings the action.” (Emphasis added.) Stegman at ¶ 33 , quoting Barrett v. Franklin, 32 Ohio App.3d 51, 54 , 513 N.E.2d 1361 (1st Dist.1986), overruled on other grounds by Perry v. Eagle-Picher Indus, Inc., 52 Ohio St.3d 168 , 556 N.E.2d 484 (1990).

2016In so finding, we acknowledge language from Stegman indicating that “the ultimate burden of complying with the temporal requirement of Civ.R. 25(A) rests with the party who brings the action.” (Emphasis added.) Stegman at ¶ 33 , quoting Barrett v. Franklin, 32 Ohio App.3d 51, 54 , 513 N.E.2d 1361 (1st Dist.1986), overruled on other grounds by Perry v. Eagle-Picher Indus, Inc., 52 Ohio St.3d 168 , 556 N.E.2d 484 (1990).

32006–2016
Perry v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. green
ohio · 1990
2 sentences

2016In so finding, we acknowledge language from Stegman indicating that “the ultimate burden of complying with the temporal requirement of Civ.R. 25(A) rests with the party who brings the action.” (Emphasis added.) Stegman at ¶ 33 , quoting Barrett v. Franklin, 32 Ohio App.3d 51, 54 , 513 N.E.2d 1361 (1st Dist.1986), overruled on other grounds by Perry v. Eagle-Picher Indus, Inc., 52 Ohio St.3d 168 , 556 N.E.2d 484 (1990).

2016In so finding, we acknowledge language from Stegman indicating that “the ultimate burden of complying with the temporal requirement of Civ.R. 25(A) rests with the party who brings the action.” (Emphasis added.) Stegman at ¶ 33 , quoting Barrett v. Franklin, 32 Ohio App.3d 51, 54 , 513 N.E.2d 1361 (1st Dist.1986), overruled on other grounds by Perry v. Eagle-Picher Indus, Inc., 52 Ohio St.3d 168 , 556 N.E.2d 484 (1990).

32006–2016
State v. Russell green
ohioctapp · 2022
1 sentence

2022The United States Supreme Court has generally interpreted this provision to mean a criminal [Cite as State v. Russell, 2022-Ohio-1746 .] defendant is entitled to the “reasonably effective assistance” of counsel.

12022–2022
Cicco v. Stockmaster green
ohio · 2000
2 sentences

2020Construing R.C. 2721.12(A) as requiring service on the attorney general at the inception of a case would create a temporal requirement that simply does not exist in the statute. 4 January Term, 2020 {¶ 11} Cincinnati argues that in Cicco v. Stockmaster, 89 Ohio St.3d 95 , 728 N.E.2d 1066 (2000), we held that R.C. 2721.12 requires service on the attorney general at the inception of a declaratory judgment action.

2020Construing R.C. 2721.12(A) as requiring service on the attorney general at the inception of a case would create a temporal requirement that simply does not exist in the statute. 4 January Term, 2020 {¶ 11} Cincinnati argues that in Cicco v. Stockmaster, 89 Ohio St.3d 95 , 728 N.E.2d 1066 (2000), we held that R.C. 2721.12 requires service on the attorney general at the inception of a declaratory judgment action.

12020–2020
State v. Thomas green
ohio · 2005
1 sentence

2016State v. Thomas, 106 Ohio St.3d 133 , 2005-Ohio-4106 , 832 N.E.2d 1190 , ¶ 13.

12016–2016
State v. Jones green
haw · 2001
2 sentences

2016Unanimity is not required, however, as to the means by which the crime was committed so long as substantial evidence supports each alternative means.” ’ ” Gardner at ¶ 49, quoting State v. Jones, 96 Haw. 161, 170 , 29 P.3d 351 (2001). {¶ 54} The elements of robbery permitted the jury to consider alternate methods to satisfy the physical harm requirement (i.e, inflict, attempt to inflict, or threaten to inflict) and the temporal requirement (i.e., during or in fleeing immediately after).

2016Unanimity is not required, however, as to the means by which the crime was committed so long as substantial evidence supports each alternative means.” ’ ” Gardner at ¶ 49, quoting State v. Jones, 96 Haw. 161, 170 , 29 P.3d 351 (2001). {¶ 54} The elements of robbery permitted the jury to consider alternate methods to satisfy the physical harm requirement (i.e, inflict, attempt to inflict, or threaten to inflict) and the temporal requirement (i.e., during or in fleeing immediately after).

12016–2016
State v. Lowe green
ohio · 2007
1 sentence

2008Id. {¶ 9} R.C. 2151.413(E) states that “[a]ny agency that files a motion for permanent custody under this section shall include in the case plan of the child who is the subject of the motion, a specific plan of the agency’s actions to seek an adoptive family for the child and to prepare the child for adoption.” (Emphasis added.) As the emphasized language reveals, the statute plainly requires a children-services agency that files a motion for permanent custody to include an adoption plan in the child’s case plan. {¶ 10} R.C. 2151.413(E) does not state a temporal requirement, though; it does no

12008–2008
Hybud Equipment Corp. v. Sphere Drake Insurance green
ohio · 1992
2 sentences

1998Co., Ltd. (1992), 64 Ohio St.3d 657 , 597 N.E.2d 1096 , the migration of PAHs into the soil does not meet the temporal requirement.

1998Co., Ltd. (1992), 64 Ohio St.3d 657 , 597 N.E.2d 1096 , the migration of PAHs into the soil does not meet the temporal requirement.

11998–1998

Where else courts name it

LA 14 (1996–2026) MI 13 (2007–2025) TX 13 (1991–2020) NY 12 (1984–2025) CA 12 (1991–2024) NJ 12 (1997–2025) OH 9 (1998–2022) IL 9 (2009–2026) IN 8 (2001–2017) WA 8 (2007–2021) PA 7 (2006–2024) VA 7 (1994–2026) CT 7 (1997–2025) DE 7 (1995–2024) ID 6 (1987–2020) FL 5 (1981–2010) MD 4 (1998–2026) RI 4 (2005–2024) MA 4 (2005–2024) NC 4 (2007–2025) AZ 4 (2013–2024) WY 3 (2003–2016) OR 3 (2001–2016) NM 3 (1996–2023) WI 3 (1994–2019) MN 3 (2007–2025) IA 3 (1997–2005) GA 2 (1985–1995) NV 2 (2013–2014) ND 2 (2023–2025) NH 2 (2004–2011) UT 2 (2006–2017) SC 2 (2002–2021)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check