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 1963–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
Blue Cross v. Hrenkogreen2 sentences2002See Blue Cross & Blue Shield Mut. of Ohio v. Hrenko (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 120, 123 , 647 N.E.2d 1358 , quoting Motorists Mut. 2002See Blue Cross & Blue Shield Mut. of Ohio v. Hrenko (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 120, 123 , 647 N.E.2d 1358 , quoting Motorists Mut. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corporation
green
2 sentences2002The Holmes test {¶ 57} I agree with the majority that the Supreme Court in Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp. (1992), 503 U.S. 258, 269 , 112 S.Ct. 1311 , 117 L.Ed.2d 532 , articulated the reason directness of relationship is a central requirement of causation. 2002The Holmes test {¶ 57} I agree with the majority that the Supreme Court in Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp. (1992), 503 U.S. 258, 269 , 112 S.Ct. 1311 , 117 L.Ed.2d 532 , articulated the reason directness of relationship is a central requirement of causation. | 2 | 2002–2002 |
Bartlett v. Nationwide Mutual Ins.
green
2 sentences2002Co. (1973), 33 Ohio St.2d 50, 52 , 62 O.O.2d 406 , 294 N.E.2d 665 . {¶ 46} I agree with Justice Holmes’s analysis, which applies in the context of a claim for underinsurance benefits as fully as it does to a claim for uninsurance benefits. 2002Co. (1973), 33 Ohio St.2d 50, 52 , 62 O.O.2d 406 , 294 N.E.2d 665 . {¶ 46} I agree with Justice Holmes’s analysis, which applies in the context of a claim for underinsurance benefits as fully as it does to a claim for uninsurance benefits. | 2 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Schlee
green
2 sentences2016Although the common pleas court was free to “recast” Holmes’s motion to identify the standard by which it should be decided, Schlee, 117 Ohio St.3d 153 , 2008-Ohio-545 , 882 N.E.2d 431 , at ¶ 12 and syllabus, the motion was not reviewable by the common pleas court as a Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw a guilty plea, because Holmes was convicted following a jury trial. 2016Although the common pleas court was free to “recast” Holmes’s motion to identify the standard by which it should be decided, Schlee, 117 Ohio St.3d 153 , 2008-Ohio-545 , 882 N.E.2d 431 , at ¶ 12 and syllabus, the motion was not reviewable by the common pleas court as a Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw a guilty plea, because Holmes was convicted following a jury trial. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Simpkins
green
1 sentence2014On the other hand, “a voidable judgment is one rendered by a court that has both jurisdiction and authority to act, but the court’s judgment is invalid, irregular, or erroneous.” State v. Simpkins, 117 Ohio St.3d 420 , 2008-Ohio-1197 , 884 N.E.2d 568 , ¶ 12. {¶13} If a judgment is void, the doctrine of res judicata has no application, and the propriety of the decision can be challenged on direct appeal or by collateral attack. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Fischer
green
2 sentences2014While the state concedes that it did not elect which count Holmes should receive his sentence, the state claims that Holmes’s challenge regarding allied offenses is barred by res judicata because he could have raised this issue in his direct appeal. {¶12} “A judgment will be deemed void when it is issued by a court which did not have subject matter jurisdiction or otherwise lacked the authority to act.” State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 , 2010-Ohio-6238 , 942 N.E.2d 332 , ¶ 6. 2014While the state concedes that it did not elect which count Holmes should receive his sentence, the state claims that Holmes’s challenge regarding allied offenses is barred by res judicata because he could have raised this issue in his direct appeal. {¶12} “A judgment will be deemed void when it is issued by a court which did not have subject matter jurisdiction or otherwise lacked the authority to act.” State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 , 2010-Ohio-6238 , 942 N.E.2d 332 , ¶ 6. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Williams
green
2 sentences1985Whether the omission was intentional or accidental, it may now be said that the alleged error has not been preserved for review on appeal under the doctrine of waiver set forth in State v. Williams (1977), 51 Ohio St. 2d 112 [ 5 O.O.3d 98 ]. 1985Whether the omission was intentional or accidental, it may now be said that the alleged error has not been preserved for review on appeal under the doctrine of waiver set forth in State v. Williams (1977), 51 Ohio St. 2d 112 [ 5 O.O.3d 98 ]. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Square Deal Market Co., Inc
green
2 sentences1963For other opinions disagreeing with the Holmes doctrine, see Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Square Deal Market Co., Inc., 206 F. 2d 482 (App. D. 1963For other opinions disagreeing with the Holmes doctrine, see Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Square Deal Market Co., Inc., 206 F. 2d 482 (App. D. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Square Deal Market Co.
green
2 sentences1963C. 1953), aff’g 109 F. Supp. 637 (D. 1963C. 1953), aff’g 109 F. Supp. 637 (D. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
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.