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.
6 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1941–2026 2 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 ex rel. Ware v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.green1 sentence2026Ware v. Dept. of Rehab. & Correction, 2024-Ohio-1015, ¶ 11 (applying a practice rule). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Simecek
green
2 sentences2002We specifically denounced this practice as a violation of due process in Simecek, 83 Ohio St.3d 320 , 699 N.E.2d 933 . 2002We specifically denounced this practice as a violation of due process in Simecek, 83 Ohio St.3d 320 , 699 N.E.2d 933 . | 2 | 2002–2002 |
State ex rel. Kelly v. Cuyahoga County Board of Elections
green
2 sentences2021Bd. of Elections, 70 Ohio St.3d 413, 415 , 639 N.E.2d 78 (1994), but this court should not continue down this road of treating 9 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO sporadic and infrequent work the same as full-time practice unless it wishes to render the practice requirement for judicial candidates completely meaningless. {¶ 30} Indeed, the word “practice” necessarily implies something more than de minimis activity. 2021Bd. of Elections, 70 Ohio St.3d 413, 415 , 639 N.E.2d 78 (1994), but this court should not continue down this road of treating 9 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO sporadic and infrequent work the same as full-time practice unless it wishes to render the practice requirement for judicial candidates completely meaningless. {¶ 30} Indeed, the word “practice” necessarily implies something more than de minimis activity. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Esparza
green
2 sentences2004In so holding, we concluded that “the trial-error/structural-error distinction is irrelevant unless it is first established that constitutional error has occurred. * * * [W]e do not think a violation of the Gillard rule is a constitutional error.” (Emphasis sic.) Esparza, 74 Ohio St.3d at 662 , 660 N.E.2d 1194 . {¶ 20} Five years later, we again considered whether an error was structural in State v. Hill, 92 Ohio St.3d 191 , 749 N.E.2d 274 . 2004In so holding, we concluded that “the trial-error/structural-error distinction is irrelevant unless it is first established that constitutional error has occurred. * * * [W]e do not think a violation of the Gillard rule is a constitutional error.” (Emphasis sic.) Esparza, 74 Ohio St.3d at 662 , 660 N.E.2d 1194 . {¶ 20} Five years later, we again considered whether an error was structural in State v. Hill, 92 Ohio St.3d 191 , 749 N.E.2d 274 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Hill
green
2 sentences2004In so holding, we concluded that “the trial-error/structural-error distinction is irrelevant unless it is first established that constitutional error has occurred. * * * [W]e do not think a violation of the Gillard rule is a constitutional error.” (Emphasis sic.) Esparza, 74 Ohio St.3d at 662 , 660 N.E.2d 1194 . {¶ 20} Five years later, we again considered whether an error was structural in State v. Hill, 92 Ohio St.3d 191 , 749 N.E.2d 274 . 2004In so holding, we concluded that “the trial-error/structural-error distinction is irrelevant unless it is first established that constitutional error has occurred. * * * [W]e do not think a violation of the Gillard rule is a constitutional error.” (Emphasis sic.) Esparza, 74 Ohio St.3d at 662 , 660 N.E.2d 1194 . {¶ 20} Five years later, we again considered whether an error was structural in State v. Hill, 92 Ohio St.3d 191 , 749 N.E.2d 274 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Jones
neutral
1 sentence1941Some cases refer to the practice as a rule of “stare deeises” in the particular court, State v Jones, supra. But in that case the court “examined the several assignments of error, the bill of exceptions and briefs,” and in fact only held as in State v Jarcho, supra, “that failure to comply with the section was a sufficient ground for the dismissal of the appeal.” To the same effect see: State v Smith, 33 Abs 612 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
State ex rel. Mayer v. Lloyd
neutral
1 sentence1941Some cases refer to the practice as a rule of “stare deeises” in the particular court, State v Jones, supra. But in that case the court “examined the several assignments of error, the bill of exceptions and briefs,” and in fact only held as in State v Jarcho, supra, “that failure to comply with the section was a sufficient ground for the dismissal of the appeal.” To the same effect see: State v Smith, 33 Abs 612 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
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.