(A) Each judge of a court of appeals shall have been admitted to practice as an attorney at law in this state for at least one year preceding the judge's appointment or commencement of the judge's term and, for a total of six years preceding the judge's appointment or commencement of the judge's term, shall have either served as a judge of a court of record in any jurisdiction in the United States or done any of the following:
(1) Engaged in the practice of law in this state;
(2) Practiced in a federal court in this state, regardless of whether at the time of that practice the person was admitted to practice as an attorney at law in this state or practiced in the courts of this state;
(3) Engaged in the authorized practice of law as in-house counsel for a business in this state or as an attorney for a government entity in this state, regardless of whether at the time of that practice the person was admitted to practice as an attorney at law in this state or practiced in the courts of this state.
(B) One judge shall be chosen in each court of appeals district every two years, and shall hold office for six years, beginning on the ninth day of February next after the judge's election.
(C) In addition to the original jurisdiction conferred by Section 3 of Article IV, Ohio Constitution, the court of appeals shall have jurisdiction upon an appeal upon questions of law to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of appeals within the district, including the finding, order, or judgment of a juvenile court that a child is delinquent, neglected, abused, or dependent, for prejudicial error committed by such lower court.
The court of appeals, on good cause shown, may issue writs of supersedeas in any case, and all other writs, not specially provided for or prohibited by statute, necessary to enforce the administration of justice.
Last updated March 27, 2023 at 1:01 PM
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 337
cases (53 in the last 5 years), 1955–2026 · leading case: In re Hartman, 443 N.E.2d 516 (Ohio 1983).
In re Hartman, 443 N.E.2d 516 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 29דWe are presented with the following question for review: Does R.C. 2501.02 proscribe the appeal of juvenile court judgments and final orders rendered in juvenile traffic offender proceedings? In particular, this court must determine the import of the word “including” as used in…”
In re Murray, 556 N.E.2d 1169 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 7ד” R.C. 2501.02 provides, inter alia, as follows: “In addition to the original jurisdiction conferred by Section 3 of Article IV, Ohio Constitution, the court shall have jurisdiction: “Upon an appeal upon questions of law to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments…”
In Re D.H., 2018 Ohio 17 (Ohio 2018). · cites it 5דThe first, R.C. 2501.02, the "jurisdictional statute," provides that courts of appeals have jurisdiction upon an appeal upon questions of law to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of appeals within…”
Stevens v. Ackman, 91 Ohio St. 3d 182 (Ohio 2001). · cites it 4ד350 also purported to amend R.C. 2501.02 to grant jurisdiction to courts of appeals “upon an appeal upon questions of law to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of appeals within the district, * * *…”
State v. Craig (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 455 (Ohio 2020). · cites it 2ד{¶ 10} Although our Constitution and several statutory provisions use the language “judgments or final orders” when describing appellate-court jurisdiction, Ohio Constitution, Article IV, Section 3(B)(2); R.C. 2501.02 and 2953.02; see also R.C. 2505.”
In re H.F., 2008 Ohio 6810 (Ohio 2008). · cites it 2דR.C. 2501.02 specifically provides appellate courts with jurisdiction “upon an appeal upon questions of law to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of appeals within the district, including the finding,…”
In re Receivership of Wisser & Gabler, 214 N.E.2d 92 (Ohio 1966). · cites it 20דSections 2501.02 and 2505.21, Bevised Code, are the sections of our Code which vest the Courts of Appeals in Ohio with jurisdiction to hear appeals on questions of law and fact.”
Stevens v. Ackman, 2001 Ohio 249 (Ohio 2001). · cites it 4ד350 also purported to amend R.C. 2501.02 to grant jurisdiction to courts of appeals “upon an appeal upon questions of law to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of appeals within the district, * * *…”
In re K.K., 2022 Ohio 3888 (Ohio 2022). · cites it 2ד02 and is appealable to the court of appeals pursuant to R.C. 2501.02.” In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 , 161, 556 N.”
In re C.B., 2011 Ohio 2899 (Ohio 2011). · cites it 2ד02 and is appealable to the courts of appeals pursuant to R.C. 2501.02.”1 Murray, syllabus. However, the principles supporting this conclusion were that parents who are suitable persons have a permanent right to the custody of their minor children, id.”
In re Agler, 249 N.E.2d 808 (Ohio 1969). · cites it 4דJurisdiction to review the judgments of Juvenile Courts is conferred upon the Courts of Appeals by Section 2501.02, Revised Code. Such refinements are the contribution of the law partner to the socio-legal enterprise of the Juvenile Court system, intended to secure due process…”
Lincoln Props., Inc. v. Goldslager, 248 N.E.2d 57 (Ohio 1969). · cites it 7ד” The Court of Appeals weighed the evidence contained in the record of the proceedings in the trial court, and accepted the testimony of value, which it had the power to do under the authority of Section 2501.02, Revised Code. 1 The defendants did not attempt to present any…”
In re Hartman, 443 N.E.2d 516 (Ohio 1983). “We are presented with the following question for review: Does R.C. 2501.02 proscribe the appeal of juvenile court judgments and final orders rendered in juvenile traffic offender proceedings? In particular, this court must determine the import of the word “including” as used in…”
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.