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 2 courts 1957–2022 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In re Disqualification of Grossmangreen2 sentences2006See, also, In Disqualification of Cleary (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 1246, 1247 , 674 N.E.2d 357 (“the fact that a party or lawyer in a pending case campaigned for or against the judge is not grounds for disqualification”). 2006See, also, In Disqualification of Cleary (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 1246, 1247 , 674 N.E.2d 357 (“the fact that a party or lawyer in a pending case campaigned for or against the judge is not grounds for disqualification”). | 1 | 2 |
United States v. Tony Lawrence Gustgreen2 sentences2022To allow container searches based on a totality-of-the- circumstances test would, in essence, have the exception swallow the rule, enabling officers “to conduct warrantless searches of indistinct and innocuous containers based solely on probable cause derived from the officers’ subjective knowledge and the circumstances,” United States v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797 , 802 (9th Cir.2005). 2022To allow container searches based on a totality-of-the- circumstances test would, in essence, have the exception swallow the rule, enabling officers “to conduct warrantless searches of indistinct and innocuous containers based solely on probable cause derived from the officers’ subjective knowledge and the circumstances,” United States v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir.2005). | 1 | 1 |
Raymond Leannais and Catherine Leannais v. Cincinnati, Incorporated and Cincinnati-Forte Company and Liberty Mutual Insurance Companygreen1 sentence1987See, e.g., Leannais v. Cincinnati, Inc. (C.A. 7, 1977), 565 F. 2d 437 ; Rhynes v. Branick Mfg. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Silverberg v. Silverberg
green
2 sentences2006I have in the past “decline[d] to establish a far-reaching rule that mandates the recusal or disqualification of a judge merely because a party to or a lawyer in the underlying case campaigned for or against the judge.” In re Disqualification of Celebrezze (1991), 74 Ohio St.3d 1231, 1232 , 657 N.E.2d 1341 . 2006I have in the past “decline[d] to establish a far-reaching rule that mandates the recusal or disqualification of a judge merely because a party to or a lawyer in the underlying case campaigned for or against the judge.” In re Disqualification of Celebrezze (1991), 74 Ohio St.3d 1231, 1232 , 657 N.E.2d 1341 . | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Pater v. Pater
green
2 sentences2005"The purpose of a far-reaching inquiry is to allow the judge to make a fully informed decision on an issue as important as which parent will raise the child." Pater v. Pater (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 393 , 396 . {¶ 61} In the instant matter, numerous witnesses testified that Appellant had anger management issues. 2004“The purpose of a far-reaching inquiry is to allow the judge to make a fully informed decision on an issue as important as which parent will raise the child.” Pater v. Pater (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 393, 396 , 588 N.E.2d 794 . {¶ 23} In sum, we find that the settlement agreement was a valid and enforceable contract, which was binding on both Mother and Father. | 2 | 2004–2005 |
Miller v. Miller
green
1 sentence2003The knowledge a trial court gains through observing the witnesses and the parties in a custody proceeding cannot be conveyed to a reviewing court by a printed record.' (Citations omitted.) Miller v. Miller (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 71 , 74 . * * * A reviewing court will not overturn a custody determination unless the trial court has acted in a manner that is arbitrary, unreasonable, or capricious. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Clark v. Jones
green
1 sentence1957It is a far-reaching principle of the law that ‘ ‘ a party shall not be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong; and courts will not so construe the contract as to enable the lessee to put an end to it at pleasure, by his own improper conduct. ’ ’ Clark v. Jones, 1 Denio, 516 , 43 Am. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
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.