language used rule (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

language used rule in Ohio

8 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2025 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Fieldsgreen
ohioctapp · 2017 · cited in 2 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022Franklin No. 16AP-417, 2017-Ohio-661, ¶ 20 (holding that the trial court made a proportionality finding “even though the trial court employed the language of R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(b), rather than the specific language of R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).”); State v. Dixon, 10th Dist.

2022Franklin No. 16AP-417, 2017-Ohio-661, ¶ 20 ; Ray at ¶ 37 (“And although the trial court did not use the explicit language of the statute, it found that consecutive sentences were not disproportionate to the danger Ray poses to the public when it noted that there were 160 grams of heroin in Ray’s apartment, ‘enough to kill a small community.’”). {¶15} Importantly, Mabe pleaded guilty to three drug-possession offenses in this case.

12

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
Jennifer R. Harris, by and Through Her Guardian Ad Litem, Lucian J. Harris, III v. Ford Motor Company green
ca9 · 1997
2 sentences

1997As noted by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Harris, “In the absence of former § 1397(k), manufacturers might claim that compliance with all Federal standards satisfies their common law tort duties as a matter of law, and that they should not be liable for a design or manufacturing defect even when no Federal standard exists.” Id., 110 F.3d at 1415 - 1416. {¶ 62} “Exemption” from liability presumes that liability attaches in the first instance.

1997As noted by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Harris , “In the absence of former § 1397(k), manufacturers might claim that compliance with all Federal standards satisfies their common law tort duties as a matter of law, and that they should not be liable for a design or manufacturing defect even when no Federal standard exists.” Id., 110 F.3d at 1415-1416 .

21997–1997
State v. Hatton green
ohio · 2022
1 sentence

2025Recently, we held that a defendant was “entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his motion [for a new trial.]” State v. Hatton, 2022-Ohio-3991, ¶ 36 .

12025–2025
State v. Rodriquez neutral
ohioctapp · 2017
1 sentence

2022Defiance No. 4-16- 16, 2017-Ohio-1318 , ¶ 12 (finding that “[a]lthough the trial court could have been clearer in the language used at the hearing,” the trial court’s statements regarding the quantity of drugs involved in the offense and the danger to public “equate” to a finding that consecutive sentences are not disproportionate); State v. Fields, 10th Dist.

12022–2022
Sutton Bank v. Progressive Polymers, L.L.C. neutral
ohioctapp · 2019
1 sentence

2020In a split decision, the Eleventh District reversed the judgment of the trial court, vacated the cognovit judgment in favor of Sutton Bank, and remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings on the bank’s complaint. 2019-Ohio-3239, ¶ 19 . {¶ 9} The court of appeals began by acknowledging that because cognovit notes allow judgment to be entered against a party without notice or hearing, they are strictly construed against the party seeking enforcement.

12020–2020
State v. Hanna green
ohio · 2002
1 sentence

2019State v. Hanna, 95 Ohio St.3d 285 , 2002-Ohio-2221, ¶ 79 . {¶ 72} This court agrees that best practice in discussing the state's burden of proof with the venire would be to avoid anecdotes or analogies that stray from the language used in the standard jury instructions.

12019–2019
State v. Hanna green
ohio · 2002
1 sentence

2019State v. Hanna, 95 Ohio St.3d 285 , 2002-Ohio-2221, ¶ 79 . {¶ 72} This court agrees that best practice in discussing the state's burden of proof with the venire would be to avoid anecdotes or analogies that stray from the language used in the standard jury instructions.

12019–2019
O'Dea v. Cook green
cal · 1917
2 sentences

1956Schoedinger, v. Lentz, 132 Ohio St., 50 , at page 57, 5 N. E. (2d), 167, it is stated: “Pension provisions must receive liberal interpretation, and ambiguities and uncertainties must be resolved in favor of those to be benefited thereunder. “ ‘Like other pension laws, pension acts applicable to members of the police force will be liberally construed. ’ 43 Corpus Juris, 813, Section 1408(b); O’Dea v. Cook, 176 Cal., 659 , 169 P., 366 .” Manifestly, also, the trustees who adopted the rule involved have á right in the exercise of sound discretion to construe the rule they adopted, and govern thei

1956Schoedinger, v. Lentz, 132 Ohio St., 50 , at page 57, 5 N. E. (2d), 167, it is stated: “Pension provisions must receive liberal interpretation, and ambiguities and uncertainties must be resolved in favor of those to be benefited thereunder. “ ‘Like other pension laws, pension acts applicable to members of the police force will be liberally construed. ’ 43 Corpus Juris, 813, Section 1408(b); O’Dea v. Cook, 176 Cal., 659 , 169 P., 366 .” Manifestly, also, the trustees who adopted the rule involved have á right in the exercise of sound discretion to construe the rule they adopted, and govern thei

11956–1956
State Ex Rel. Schoedinger v. Lentz green
· 1936
1 sentence

1956Schoedinger, v. Lentz, 132 Ohio St., 50 , at page 57, 5 N. E. (2d), 167, it is stated: “Pension provisions must receive liberal interpretation, and ambiguities and uncertainties must be resolved in favor of those to be benefited thereunder. “ ‘Like other pension laws, pension acts applicable to members of the police force will be liberally construed. ’ 43 Corpus Juris, 813, Section 1408(b); O’Dea v. Cook, 176 Cal., 659 , 169 P., 366 .” Manifestly, also, the trustees who adopted the rule involved have á right in the exercise of sound discretion to construe the rule they adopted, and govern thei

11956–1956

Where else courts name it

IL 29 (1878–2022) CA 15 (1909–2020) MO 10 (1903–2013) TX 9 (1931–2015) IN 8 (1904–2015) OH 8 (1956–2025) PA 7 (2003–2023) NC 6 (1944–2024) OK 6 (1906–1958) ID 5 (1898–1964) WA 5 (1913–2020) FL 5 (1985–2008) VA 4 (1932–1980) CO 4 (1966–2025) NY 4 (1916–1995) MD 4 (1997–2012) MS 4 (1955–1998) TN 3 (1912–2024) NE 2 (1932–1945) IA 2 (1926–1998) CT 2 (1986–2007) KY 2 (1910–1937) WI 2 (1882–1927) AL 2 (2016–2017) MN 2 (1964–1994) LA 2 (1904–2005) NJ 2 (1971–1975)

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