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.
8 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2008 0 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. Bistrickygreen2 sentences2008See State v. Bistricky (1990), 66 Ohio App .3d 395, 397, 584 N.E.2d 75 . 2008See State v. Bistricky (1990), 66 Ohio App .3d 395, 397, 584 N.E.2d 75 . {¶ 47} Appellant's Sixth Assignment of Error is found moot. {¶ 48} For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County, Ohio, is hereby affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. | 4 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
North Canton v. Hutchinson
green
2 sentences2006Id., citing City of North Canton v. Hutchinson, 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 , 661 N.E.2d 1000 ; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , 92 N.E.21 (holding that an appellate court is not required to issue an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case). {¶ 6} Accordingly, the State's assignments of error are overruled. 1 Judgment affirmed. 2006Council (1969), 22 Ohio App. 2d 39 , 43 . 7 City of North Canton v. Hutchinson (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 ; Egan v. National Distillers Chemical Corp. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 176 , syllabus; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . 8 We note that this court in State v. McCann, Cuyahoga App. No. 85657, 2006-Ohio-171 , recently resolved this issue based on standing. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Housing Auth. v. Union
green
2 sentences2006Id., citing City of North Canton v. Hutchinson, 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 , 661 N.E.2d 1000 ; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , 92 N.E.21 (holding that an appellate court is not required to issue an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case). {¶ 6} Accordingly, the State's assignments of error are overruled. 1 Judgment affirmed. 2006Council (1969), 22 Ohio App. 2d 39 , 43 . 7 City of North Canton v. Hutchinson (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 ; Egan v. National Distillers Chemical Corp. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 176 , syllabus; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . 8 We note that this court in State v. McCann, Cuyahoga App. No. 85657, 2006-Ohio-171 , recently resolved this issue based on standing. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Bistricky
green
2 sentences2006Council (1969), 22 Ohio App. 2d 39 , 43 . 7 City of North Canton v. Hutchinson (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 ; Egan v. National Distillers Chemical Corp. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 176 , syllabus; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . 8 We note that this court in State v. McCann, Cuyahoga App. No. 85657, 2006-Ohio-171 , recently resolved this issue based on standing. 2004No. CA2001-03-028, 2001-Ohio-8689 , citing Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . | 2 | 2004–2006 |
City of North Canton v. Hutchinson
green
2 sentences2006Id., citing City of North Canton v. Hutchinson, 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 , 661 N.E.2d 1000 ; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , 92 N.E.21 (holding that an appellate court is not required to issue an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case). {¶ 6} Accordingly, the State's assignments of error are overruled. 1 Judgment affirmed. 2006Council (1969), 22 Ohio App. 2d 39 , 43 . 7 City of North Canton v. Hutchinson (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 ; Egan v. National Distillers Chemical Corp. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 176 , syllabus; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . 8 We note that this court in State v. McCann, Cuyahoga App. No. 85657, 2006-Ohio-171 , recently resolved this issue based on standing. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Folmar v. Griffin, 07 Cae 06 0025 (6-17-2008)
neutral
1 sentence2008Fomar v. Griffin , Delaware App. No. CAE06 0025, 2008-Ohio-2941 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Matthews
green
1 sentence2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Rogers
green
1 sentence2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Adams
green
1 sentence2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Egan v. National Distillers & Chemical Corp.
green
1 sentence2006Council (1969), 22 Ohio App. 2d 39 , 43 . 7 City of North Canton v. Hutchinson (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 ; Egan v. National Distillers Chemical Corp. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 176 , syllabus; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . 8 We note that this court in State v. McCann, Cuyahoga App. No. 85657, 2006-Ohio-171 , recently resolved this issue based on standing. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Schiebel
green
2 sentences2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. 2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Matthews
green
1 sentence2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. McCann, Unpublished Decision (1-19-2006)
neutral
1 sentence2006Council (1969), 22 Ohio App. 2d 39 , 43 . 7 City of North Canton v. Hutchinson (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 112 , 114 , 1996-Ohio-170 ; Egan v. National Distillers Chemical Corp. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 176 , syllabus; Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237 , 238 , (stating that an appellate court is not required to render an advisory opinion to rule on a question of law that cannot affect matters at issue in a case); State v. Bistricky (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 157 , 158 . 8 We note that this court in State v. McCann, Cuyahoga App. No. 85657, 2006-Ohio-171 , recently resolved this issue based on standing. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
City of Toledo v. Stuart
green
1 sentence2006We agree with that analysis, and add both ripeness and advisory opinions as also jurisdictional bars to his claim. 9 State v. Matthew, 81 Ohio St.3d 375 , 1998-Ohio-433 , citing State v. Schiebel (1990), 55 Ohio St. 3d 71 , paragraph one of the syllabus. 10 State v. Schiebel, supra. 11 State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151 . 12 State v. Rogers (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 4 , 7 ; Toledo v. Stuart (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 292 , 293 . 13 Duncan also alleged juror misconduct as grounds for granting a new trial. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.