Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2321.18 (2026)

New trial or reversal granted only once

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked July 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The same trial court shall not grant more than one new trial on the weight of the evidence against the same party in the same case, nor shall the same court grant more than one judgment of reversal on the weight of the evidence against the same party in the same case.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case: Eastley v. Volkman, 2012-Ohio-2179, 972 N.E.2d 517.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Eastley v. Volkman, 2012-Ohio-2179, 972 N.E.2d 517. “; see also R.C. 2321.18 (“The same trial court shall not grant more than one new trial on the weight of the evidence against the same party in *336 the same case, nor shall the same court grant more than one judgment of reversal on the weight of the evidence against the same…”
Gevedon v. Ivey, 876 N.E.2d 604 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 2007). “01; R.C. 2321.18; R.C. 2945.831. {¶ 33} “Furthermore, the C.”
Walls v. Combs, 222 N.E.2d 628 (Ohio 1966). · cites it 2× “However, we recognize that the evidence in the records in the instant cases were such as to justify reasonable minds in finding either for or against the mother on the question of whether she “willfully failed to properly support and maintain” the children “for a period of more…”
Reed v. Key-Chrysler Plymouth, 708 N.E.2d 1021 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1998). “01; R.C. 2321.18; R.C. 2945.831. Furthermore, the C.”
Green v. Acacia Mut. Life Ins., 128 N.E.2d 222 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1954). · cites it 2× “This situation presents the question of whether we can consider this assignment of error in view of the fact that the trial court had already granted one new trial on that ground and was prohibited by Section 11577, General Code (Section 2321.18, Revised Code), from granting a…”
Armstrong v. Nettles, 2026-Ohio-214. · cites it 4× “Also violating appellant constitutional rights, requiring reversal under Section 2321.18 . {¶ 10} In his brief, appellant argues three points in support of his assignment.”
Trout v. Tipton, 153 N.E.2d 158 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1958). “We will refer to §2321.18 R. C., which is as follows: “The same trial court shall not grant more than one new trial on the weight of the evidence against the same party in the same case, nor shall the same court grant more than one judgment of reversal on the weight of the…”
Wheeler v. Dericksen, 194 N.E.2d 908 (Ohio Ct. App. 1962). · cites it 2× “Upon review of the record presented upon this appeal, it is apparent that the court failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 2505.”
Nw. Nat'l Ins. v. Billings, 192 N.E.2d 293 (Ohio Ct. App. 1963). · cites it 2× “Section 2321.18, Revised Code, provides: “The same trial court shall not grant more than one new trial on the weight of the evidence against the same party in the same case, nor shall the same court grant more than one judgment of reversal on the weight of the evidence against…”
Nw. Nat'l Ins. v. Billings, 182 N.E.2d 334 (Ohio Ct. App. 1962). · cites it 2× “Section 2321.18, Eevised Code, provides: “The same trial court shall not grant more than one new trial on the weight of the evidence against the same party in the same case, nor shall the same court grant more than one judgment of reversal on the weight of the evidence against…”
State ex rel. Blasko v. McGinnis, 167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 532 (Ohio 1958). · cites it 2× “The unusualness of the instant case in part prompted the allowance of the motion to certify. The law recognizes that the discretion of the trial court in this area can be abused.”
Poske v. Mergl, 169 Ohio St. 70 (Ohio 1959). · cites it 2× ““A final order, judgment, or decree shall be vacated and a new trial granted by the trial court on the application of a party aggrieved, for any of the following causes affecting materially his substantial rights: i i * # # “(F) That the final order, judgment, or decree is not…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.