(A) Civil actions against the state for ten thousand dollars or less shall be determined administratively by the clerk of the court of claims, except that the clerk is not required to administratively determine a civil action of that nature if the civil action was commenced by a person who has been found to be a vexatious litigator under section 2323.52 of the Revised Code and who has failed to obtain leave to proceed under that section and if the clerk refused pursuant to division (D) of section 2743.09 of the Revised Code to accept for filing any pleading or paper that relates to the civil action and that was submitted for filing by that person and except that all civil actions against the state that have been removed to the court of claims shall be heard and determined by a judge of the court of claims.
(B) Civil actions covered by division (A) of this section shall be commenced by filing with the clerk on complaint forms prescribed by the supreme court. The clerk shall forward copies of the form complaint to the attorney general and the state department, board, office, commission, agency, institution, or other instrumentality whose actions or failure to act are the subject of complaint. The latter shall investigate the allegations made in the form complaint and report the results of its investigation to the clerk within sixty days of receipt of a copy of the form complaint. The clerk shall forward a copy of the report to the claimant and give the claimant an opportunity to respond to the report either in writing or by appearing before the clerk.
(C) The clerk shall determine the civil action covered by division (A) of this section and make a report of the decision, together with findings of fact and conclusions of law, copies of which shall be mailed to the claimant and the state instrumentality. Except as otherwise provided in this division, the determination shall be based upon principles of law applicable in the court of claims, including, but not limited to, section 3345.40 of the Revised Code if a state university or college is a defendant in the court of claims.
Rules of evidence shall not be applicable in the determination. Procedures shall be governed by rules promulgated by the clerk, shall be informal, and shall be designed to accommodate persons who are not skilled in the law.
(D) Upon the motion of a party, the court of claims shall review the determination of the clerk upon the clerk's report and papers filed in the action and shall enter judgment consistent with its findings. The judgment shall not be the subject of further appeal. No civil action arising out of the same transaction or set of facts may be commenced by the claimant in the court of claims.
(E) The determination of the clerk pursuant to division (C) of this section shall be processed pursuant to section 2743.19 of the Revised Code as if it were a judgment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 58
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: Ojalvo v. Bd. of Trs., 466 N.E.2d 875 (Ohio 1984).
Ojalvo v. Bd. of Trs., 466 N.E.2d 875 (Ohio 1984). · cites it 5ד” To buttress what might otherwise be an adequate reason, appellee offers the further refinement that each of the three thousand to six thousand potential claims should be handled on an individualized basis, administratively, pursuant to R.C. 2743.10. Appellee hypothesizes “the…”
Manning v. Ohio State Library Bd., 577 N.E.2d 650 (Ohio 1991). “Further, R.C. 2743.10(A) imposes yet another condition not found in Title VII.”
Harris v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2021 Ohio 4281 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5דRegardless to the phraseology of the argument raised by appellant, because R.C. 2743.10 requires the Court of Claims to determine certain civil actions administratively, we must dismiss appellant's action.”
Harris v. Grafton Corr. Inst., 2010 Ohio 5217 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2010). · cites it 2ד” R.C. 2743.10 does not confer equity jurisdiction at the Administrative Determination level of this court.”
Shupe v. Ohio Dep't of Transp., 2004 Ohio 644 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2004). · cites it 2דThis case came to be heard by the court upon defendant’s motion for court review of the clerk’s determination pursuant to R.C. 2743.10(D). On December 15, 2003, the court issued an entry scheduling oral argument on the motion for January 16, 2004.”
Rink v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2018 Ohio 3633 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4דLEGAL ANALYSIS {¶ 5} R.C. 2743.10 requires the Court of Claims to determine certain civil actions administratively.”
Patterson v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2010 Ohio 6619 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2010). · cites it 2ד” R.C. 2743.10 does not confer equity jurisdiction at the Administrative Determination level of this court.”
Fikes v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2024 Ohio 2826 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 10ד{¶ 3} On May 23, 2023, ODRC filed a motion to have Fikes’ case transferred to the Court of Claims administrative docket for decision by the clerk of court of claims, in accordance with R.C. 2743.10. Pursuant to subsection (A) of the statute, “[c]ivil actions against the state…”
State Ex Rel. Thomson v. Clerk, Court of Claims, 1997 Ohio 322 (Ohio 1997). “See R.C. 2743.10(D) (“Upon the motion of a party, the court of claims shall review the determination of the clerk upon the clerk’s report and papers filed in the action and shall enter judgment consistent with its findings.”
Irby v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2017 Ohio 2629 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 9דThe 822AD case was determined not by a judge of a court but by a deputy clerk pursuant to R.C. 2743.10 which provides that cases seeking $10,000 or less in the Court of Claims are to be administratively determined by the clerk of the Court of Claims.”
Alfson v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2010 Ohio 5220 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2010). “00 the statutory maximum allowed under R.C. 2743.10. Plaintiff submitted an estimate for truck repair in the amount of $2,741.”
Woods v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2017 Ohio 1022 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6ד1991), and appellant's review and exclusive remedy lay with, and is confined to, the statutory process set forth in R.C. 2743.10. For these reasons, we find the entry issued by the Court of Claims transferring the matter to the clerk of courts for an administrative determination…”
Manning v. Ohio State Library Bd., 577 N.E.2d 650 (Ohio 1991). “Further, R.C. 2743.10(A) imposes yet another condition not found in Title VII.”
Harris v. Grafton Corr. Inst., 2010 Ohio 5217 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2010). “” R.C. 2743.10 does not confer equity jurisdiction at the Administrative Determination level of this court.”
Patterson v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2010 Ohio 6619 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2010). “” R.C. 2743.10 does not confer equity jurisdiction at the Administrative Determination level of this court.”
Harris v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2021 Ohio 4281 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Regardless to the phraseology of the argument raised by appellant, because R.C. 2743.10 requires the Court of Claims to determine certain civil actions administratively, we must dismiss appellant's action.”
Woods v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2017 Ohio 1022 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “1991), and appellant's review and exclusive remedy lay with, and is confined to, the statutory process set forth in R.C. 2743.10. For these reasons, we find the entry issued by the Court of Claims transferring the matter to the clerk of courts for an administrative determination…”
Irby v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2017 Ohio 2629 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “The 822AD case was determined not by a judge of a court but by a deputy clerk pursuant to R.C. 2743.10 which provides that cases seeking $10,000 or less in the Court of Claims are to be administratively determined by the clerk of the Court of Claims.”
Irby v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2017 Ohio 2629 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “The 822AD case was determined not by a judge of a court but by a deputy clerk pursuant to R.C. 2743.10 which provides that cases seeking $10,000 or less in the Court of Claims are to be administratively determined by the clerk of the Court of Claims.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2743.10(D) — 10 cases
Shupe v. Ohio Dep't of Transp., 2004 Ohio 644 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2004). “This case came to be heard by the court upon defendant’s motion for court review of the clerk’s determination pursuant to R.C. 2743.10(D). On December 15, 2003, the court issued an entry scheduling oral argument on the motion for January 16, 2004.”
Rink v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2018 Ohio 3633 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “LEGAL ANALYSIS {¶ 5} R.C. 2743.10 requires the Court of Claims to determine certain civil actions administratively.”
Harris v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2021 Ohio 4281 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Regardless to the phraseology of the argument raised by appellant, because R.C. 2743.10 requires the Court of Claims to determine certain civil actions administratively, we must dismiss appellant's action.”
State Ex Rel. Thomson v. Clerk, Court of Claims, 1997 Ohio 322 (Ohio 1997). “See R.C. 2743.10(D) (“Upon the motion of a party, the court of claims shall review the determination of the clerk upon the clerk’s report and papers filed in the action and shall enter judgment consistent with its findings.”
Fikes v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2024 Ohio 2826 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). “{¶ 3} On May 23, 2023, ODRC filed a motion to have Fikes’ case transferred to the Court of Claims administrative docket for decision by the clerk of court of claims, in accordance with R.C. 2743.10. Pursuant to subsection (A) of the statute, “[c]ivil actions against the state…”
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.