56 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2026 18 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. Harper (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2021Lake No. 2017-L-038, 2017-Ohio-7963 , ¶ 8 (“an appellate court’s standard of review on the denial of a motion to vacate void judgment is de novo”). {¶8} “A defendant’s ability to challenge an entry at any time is the very essence of an entry being void, not voidable.” (Citation omitted.) State v. Harper, 160 Ohio St.3d 480 , 2020-Ohio-2913 , 159 N.E.3d 248, ¶ 18 . 2021Lake No. 2017-L-038, 2017-Ohio-7963 , ¶ 8 (“an appellate court’s standard of review on the denial of a motion to vacate void judgment is de novo”). {¶8} “A defendant’s ability to challenge an entry at any time is the very essence of an entry being void, not voidable.” (Citation omitted.) State v. Harper, 160 Ohio St.3d 480 , 2020-Ohio-2913 , 159 N.E.3d 248, ¶ 18 . | 1 | 3 |
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Scottgreen2 sentences2025“Although the lender is required to establish standing in order to meet its burden of proof in a foreclosure action, the borrower’s ability to challenge standing by attacking the assignment is limited.” Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Scott, 2015-Ohio-3269, ¶ 17 (2d Dist.). 2024Montgomery No. 26552, 2015-Ohio-3269, ¶ 17 . | 1 | 2 |
City of Huber Heights v. Dutygreen2 sentences2017See, e.g., Huber Heights v. Duty, 27 Ohio App.3d 244 (2d Dist.1985) (declining to reach merits of trial court's failure to grant motion to suppress where defendant entered guilty pleas to offenses); State v. McPherson, 8th Dist. 2001State v. Elliott (1993), 86 Ohio App.3d 792 , 795 ; Huber Hts. v. Duty (1985), 27 Ohio App.3d 244 , syllabus; State v. Lewis (Dec. 19, 1997), Trumbull App. No. 96-T-5522, unreported, 1997 WL 799537 , at fn. 1. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Brooksgreen1 sentence2026State v. Brooks, 2025-Ohio-3292, ¶ 7 (2d Dist.). | 1 | 1 |
In re E.E.D.green1 sentence2025See In re E.E.D., 2022-Ohio-4014, ¶ 48-49 (8th Dist.). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Selfgreen1 sentence2024State v. Self, 56 Ohio St.3d 73, 81 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kelleygreen1 sentence2024In support of its waiver argument, the State cites cases in which this court and the Ohio Supreme Court have held that a voluntary guilty plea in adult court waives the ability to challenge the ruling on a pretrial suppression motion, State v. Obermiller, 2016-Ohio-1594, ¶ 56 , to claim his or her statutory speedy trial rights were violated, State v. Kelley, 57 Ohio St.3d 127, 130 (1991), or to claim ineffective assistance of counsel, unless the plea was induced by that ineffective assistance, State v. Geraci, 2015-Ohio-2699 , ¶ 14 (8th Dist.). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Michael L. Meekergreen1 sentence2023It also cited to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in U.S. v. Meeker, 411 F.3d 736, 742 (6th Cir.2005), where the court pointed out that “not having, before the sentencing hearing, emotional-impact evidence from a victim ultimately matters little because the defendant cannot really rebut the evidence.” Shackleford at ¶ 25, citing Meeker at 742 . | 1 | 1 |
State ex rel. Allen Cty. Children Servs. Bd. v. Mercer Cty. Common Pleas Court, Probate Div. (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2023And by “parentage,” we meant biological parentage, because paternity “affect[s] the probate court’s ability to rule on the concurrent adoption petitions.” (Emphasis sic.) Id. at ¶ 35; see also Allen Cty., 150 Ohio St.3d 230 , 2016-Ohio-7382 , 81 N.E.3d 380, at ¶ 38 (“Pushcar required the probate court to refrain from proceeding while there was a question of parentage—i.e., paternity—pending in the juvenile court” [emphasis sic]). 2023And by “parentage,” we meant biological parentage, because paternity “affect[s] the probate court’s ability to rule on the concurrent adoption petitions.” (Emphasis sic.) Id. at ¶ 35; see also Allen Cty., 150 Ohio St.3d 230 , 2016-Ohio-7382 , 81 N.E.3d 380, at ¶ 38 (“Pushcar required the probate court to refrain from proceeding while there was a question of parentage—i.e., paternity—pending in the juvenile court” [emphasis sic]). | 1 | 1 |
Costello v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2022See, e.g., Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 362 , 76 S.Ct. 406 , 100 L.Ed. 397 (1956). “[A]n indictment ‘fair upon its face,’ and returned by a ‘properly constituted grand jury,’ ” we have explained, “conclusively determines the existence of probable cause” to believe the defendant perpetrated the offense alleged. 2022See, e.g., Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 362 , 76 S.Ct. 406 , 100 L.Ed. 397 (1956). “[A]n indictment ‘fair upon its face,’ and returned by a ‘properly constituted grand jury,’ ” we have explained, “conclusively determines the existence of probable cause” to believe the defendant perpetrated the offense alleged. | 1 | 1 |
State ex rel. Youngstown v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Elections (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2017See Youngstown , 144 Ohio St.3d 239 , 2015-Ohio-3761 , 41 N.E.3d 1229 , at ¶ 11. {¶ 52} Finally, the BOE objects to language in the proposed amendments purporting to limit the ability to challenge the amendments; the BOE calls these "administrative" provisions. 2017See Youngstown , 144 Ohio St.3d 239 , 2015-Ohio-3761 , 41 N.E.3d 1229 , at ¶ 11. {¶ 52} Finally, the BOE objects to language in the proposed amendments purporting to limit the ability to challenge the amendments; the BOE calls these "administrative" provisions. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cartergreen1 sentence2017No. 05AP-982, 2006-Ohio-3144, ¶ 14 , quoting State v. Carter, 124 Ohio App.3d 423, 429 (2d Dist.1997) ("An Alford plea is 'merely a species of a guilty plea, having the effect of waiving [a defendant's] right to appeal.' "). {¶ 10} In arguing appellant waived the right to raise the issues presented on appeal, the state relies on case law generally holding that a plea of guilty waives a defendant's ability to challenge the denial of pretrial motions. | 1 | 1 |
| State v. South (Slip Opinion)green | 1 | 1 |
| State ex rel. Newton v. Court of Claimsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| DiGiorgio v. City of Clevelandgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Supportive Solutions Training Academy, L.L.C. v. Elec. Classroom of Tomorrowgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Paynegreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Pasqualonegreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. McCauslandgreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Cottongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Pratts v. Hurleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Patrick (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2023But see State v. Patrick, 164 Ohio St.3d 309 , 2020-Ohio-6803 , 172 N.E.3d 952, ¶ 1-2, 22 (constitutional challenge to sentence could be maintained despite prohibition against appellate review in R.C. 2953.08(D)(3)).2 R.C. 2953.08(D)(1)’s limitation on a defendant’s ability to challenge a jointly recommended sentence on appeal applies to sentences imposed pursuant to plea agreements involving an agreed specific term, plea agreements involving a jointly recommended sentencing range and plea agreements involving pleas to multiple offenses with a jointly recommended aggregate sentencing range. 2023But see State v. Patrick, 164 Ohio St.3d 309 , 2020-Ohio-6803 , 172 N.E.3d 952, ¶ 1-2, 22 (constitutional challenge to sentence could be maintained despite prohibition against appellate review in R.C. 2953.08(D)(3)).2 R.C. 2953.08(D)(1)’s limitation on a defendant’s ability to challenge a jointly recommended sentence on appeal applies to sentences imposed pursuant to plea agreements involving an agreed specific term, plea agreements involving a jointly recommended sentencing range and plea agreements involving pleas to multiple offenses with a jointly recommended aggregate sentencing range. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chase Manhattan Mtge. v. Urquhart, Unpublished Decision (9-6-2005)
green
2 sentences2008Corp. , supra. On the other hand, once an appeal is filed, a trial court loses the ability to rule upon a Civ. 2008Corp. , supra. On the other hand, a trial court loses the ability to rule upon a Civ. | 6 | 2008–2008 |
Singer v. Dickinson
green
2 sentences2024“The net value of the deduction itself, however, does not determine the total tax benefit under either [Singer v. Dickinson, 63 Ohio St.3d 408, 414 , 588 N.E.2d 806 (1992)], or R.C. 3119.82, because while the net value of the ability to claim the exemption may be greater for the party who has the higher income (presuming that the individual with greater income pays tax at a higher rate), the party with the lower income may be eligible for other credits, deductions, or exemptions by virtue of the ability to claim a dependent child. 2024“The net value of the deduction itself, however, does not determine the total tax benefit under either [Singer v. Dickinson, 63 Ohio St.3d 408, 414 , 588 N.E.2d 806 (1992)], or R.C. 3119.82, because while the net value of the ability to claim the exemption may be greater for the party who has the higher income (presuming that the individual with greater income pays tax at a higher rate), the party with the lower income may be eligible for other credits, deductions, or exemptions by virtue of the ability to claim a dependent child. | 2 | 2012–2024 |
State v. Obermiller (Slip Opinion)
green
1 sentence2024In support of its waiver argument, the State cites cases in which this court and the Ohio Supreme Court have held that a voluntary guilty plea in adult court waives the ability to challenge the ruling on a pretrial suppression motion, State v. Obermiller, 2016-Ohio-1594, ¶ 56 , to claim his or her statutory speedy trial rights were violated, State v. Kelley, 57 Ohio St.3d 127, 130 (1991), or to claim ineffective assistance of counsel, unless the plea was induced by that ineffective assistance, State v. Geraci, 2015-Ohio-2699 , ¶ 14 (8th Dist.). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State ex rel. Scott v. Streetsboro (Slip Opinion)
neutral
1 sentence2024Scott v. Streetsboro, 2016-Ohio-3308, ¶ 14 . 18 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS waived the ability to challenge it now. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
In RE ADOPTION OF M.G.B.-E. Et Al.
green
2 sentences2022Further, we have limited Pushcar and its progeny to require a probate court to refrain from proceeding with an adoption only when an issue of parentage pending in another court “affect[s] the probate court’s ability to rule on the concurrent adoption petitions.” (Emphasis sic.) In re Adoption of M.G.B.-E., 154 Ohio St.3d 17 , 2018-Ohio-1787 , 110 N.E.3d 1236, ¶ 35 . {¶ 36} The probate court had jurisdiction over H.P.’s adoption proceeding and was authorized to make its determination that K.W.’s consent was not required before K.W. filed anything in the juvenile court. 2022Further, we have limited Pushcar and its progeny to require a probate court to refrain from proceeding with an adoption only when an issue of parentage pending in another court “affect[s] the probate court’s ability to rule on the concurrent adoption petitions.” (Emphasis sic.) In re Adoption of M.G.B.-E., 154 Ohio St.3d 17 , 2018-Ohio-1787 , 110 N.E.3d 1236, ¶ 35 . {¶ 36} The probate court had jurisdiction over H.P.’s adoption proceeding and was authorized to make its determination that K.W.’s consent was not required before K.W. filed anything in the juvenile court. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Ford (Slip Opinion)
green
1 sentence2022State v. Ford, 158 Ohio St.3d 139 , 2019-Ohio-4539 , 140 N.E.3d 616 , ¶ 196. conclude that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress and the second assignment of error is overruled. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
In re Palcisco
green
1 sentence2022Trumbull No. 2012-T-0031, 2012-Ohio-6134 (relying on Castle to reject argument that R.C. 3119.86(A) does not grant a domestic relations court whose jurisdiction has terminated pursuant to R.C. 3119.86(B) or (C) the ability to claim ”power anew” on behalf of an “adult-aged child who is disabled”); In re Edgell, 11th Dist. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State ex rel. Romine v. McIntosh (Slip Opinion)
green
2 sentences2021Romine v. McIntosh, 162 Ohio St.3d 501 , 2020-Ohio-6826, ¶ 12 . 2021Romine v. McIntosh, 162 Ohio St.3d 501 , 2020-Ohio-6826, ¶ 12 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Berry
green
2 sentences2021These pivotal points along the continuum of a death-penalty prosecution are critical events that could serve in whole or in part to tip the scales of justice toward or away from the ultimate punishment—death. {¶ 201} Therefore, it is understood that R.C. 2945.37(B) dictates that when requested before trial, a competency examination is mandatory and that when a defendant wishes to waive the ability to challenge an imposed death sentence, a 57 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO competency hearing is required, see State v. Berry, 80 Ohio St.3d 371, 375 , 686 N.E.2d 1097 (1997). 2021These pivotal points along the continuum of a death-penalty prosecution are critical events that could serve in whole or in part to tip the scales of justice toward or away from the ultimate punishment—death. {¶ 201} Therefore, it is understood that R.C. 2945.37(B) dictates that when requested before trial, a competency examination is mandatory and that when a defendant wishes to waive the ability to challenge an imposed death sentence, a 57 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO competency hearing is required, see State v. Berry, 80 Ohio St.3d 371, 375 , 686 N.E.2d 1097 (1997). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Ropp
green
1 sentence2020However, in two apparently little-recognized cases, the Ohio Supreme court has held that a failure to timely file a Crim.R. 29(A) motion during a [Cite as State v. Ropp, 2020-Ohio-824 .] jury trial does not waive an argument on appeal concerning the sufficiency of the evidence. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Montgomery v. Montgomery, H-06-035 (5-25-2007)
green
1 sentence2019Huron No. H-06-035, 2007-Ohio-2539 , ¶ 27- 28 (noting that the ability to claim a dependent on the earned income credit could provide more of a benefit to one parent notwithstanding the other parent’s higher income). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. City of Cleveland
neutral
2 sentences2018Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. Cleveland, 106 Ohio St.3d 70 , 2005-Ohio-3807 , 831 N.E.2d 987 , ¶ 54, we should not foreclose a respondent’s ability to challenge a finding of domestic violence in a CPO when we know that it is probable or certain that that finding will have an effect on future parenting determinations. 2018Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. Cleveland , 106 Ohio St.3d 70 , 2005-Ohio-3807 , 831 N.E.2d 987 , ¶ 54, we should not foreclose a respondent's ability to challenge a finding of domestic violence in a CPO when we know that it is probable or certain that that finding will have an effect on future parenting determinations. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Webster
green
1 sentence2018Cuyahoga No. 104484, 2017-Ohio-932, ¶ 7 , citing State v. Akins-Daniels, 8th Dist. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hall v. Beals
green
1 sentence2017Id. at 1037 ; Conde v. Open Door Marketing, LLC , 223 F.Supp.3d 949 , 960 (N.D.Cal.2017) ("[p]laintiffs are not personally affected by the arbitration agreements at issue because they have not signed agreements that contain similar terms," and "therefore have no interest in the enforceability of the arbitration agreement itself, and lack the ability to challenge the agreements on behalf of individuals who did sign such agreements"); Tan , 2016 WL 4721439 , at *6 (the named plaintiff "has no standing to challenge the applicability or enforceability of the arbitration and class action waiver pro | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Conde v. Open Door Marketing, LLC
green
1 sentence2017Id. at 1037 ; Conde v. Open Door Marketing, LLC , 223 F.Supp.3d 949 , 960 (N.D.Cal.2017) ("[p]laintiffs are not personally affected by the arbitration agreements at issue because they have not signed agreements that contain similar terms," and "therefore have no interest in the enforceability of the arbitration agreement itself, and lack the ability to challenge the agreements on behalf of individuals who did sign such agreements"); Tan , 2016 WL 4721439 , at *6 (the named plaintiff "has no standing to challenge the applicability or enforceability of the arbitration and class action waiver pro | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Goldfuss v. Davidson
green
2 sentences2017“In appeals of civil cases, the plain error doctrine is not favored and may be applied only in the extremely rare case involving exceptional circumstances where error, to which no objection was made at the trial court, seriously affects the basic fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial process, thereby challenging the legitimacy of the underlying judicial process itself.” Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 , 679 N.E.2d 1099 (1997), syllabus. 4 {¶11} Essentially, we must determine whether the municipal court committed plain error in its determination that there were no er 2017“In appeals of civil cases, the plain error doctrine is not favored and may be applied only in the extremely rare case involving exceptional circumstances where error, to which no objection was made at the trial court, seriously affects the basic fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial process, thereby challenging the legitimacy of the underlying judicial process itself.” Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 , 679 N.E.2d 1099 (1997), syllabus. 4 {¶11} Essentially, we must determine whether the municipal court committed plain error in its determination that there were no er | 1 | 2017–2017 |
National Labor Relations Board v. Alternative Entertainment, Inc.
green
1 sentence2017Labor Relations Bd. v. Alternative Entertainment, Inc. , 858 F.3d 393 (6th Cir.2017), does not foreclose the issue of whether Gembarski satisfies the typicality and adequacy requirements for class certification. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| State v. Darks, Unpublished Decision (6-22-2006) green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Geauga County Bar Ass'n v. Taber green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| State v. Smorgala green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Painter v. Graley green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Nemeth v. Nemeth, 2008-G-2830 (9-12-2008) neutral | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Bank of New York Mellon v. Clancy green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Rodgers v. Capots green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| State v. Pettway neutral | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Eastley v. Volkman green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Hughes v. Cuyahoga County Republican Party Executive Committee green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Aetna Insurance v. Kennedy Ex Rel. Bogash green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Johnson v. Zerbst green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| State v. Gilmore, C-070521 (7-11-2008) green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| State v. Adams green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| State v. Gardner green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| State v. Fore green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| Village of Montpelier v. Greeno green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| Brott Mardis & Co. v. Camp green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| State v. Johnson neutral | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| State v. Schoen green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Woods v. Telb green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Evans v. Medical & Professional Collection Services, Inc. green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| State v. Elliott green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.