The cause of death and the manner and mode in which the death occurred, as delivered by the coroner and incorporated in the coroner's verdict and in the death certificate filed with the division of vital statistics, shall be the legally accepted manner and mode in which such death occurred, and the legally accepted cause of death, unless the court of common pleas of the county in which the death occurred, after a hearing, directs the coroner to change his decision as to such cause and manner and mode of death.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Perez v. Cleveland, 678 N.E.2d 537 (Ohio 1997).
Perez v. Cleveland, 678 N.E.2d 537 (Ohio 1997). · cites it 17דIn this case we determine whether that portion of R.C. 313.19 authorizing judicial review of a coroner’s verdict regarding the cause of death and the manner and mode in which the death occurred can be given effect under the Due Process Clauses of our state and federal…”
Vargo v. Travelers Ins., 516 N.E.2d 226 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 14דThe first question is whether R.C. 313.19 impermissibly denies civil litigants due process of law by requiring fact-finders to accept, as a matter of law, the coroner’s findings concerning the manner, mode and cause of death.”
Est. of Severt v. Wood, 667 N.E.2d 1250 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 41דFirst, he contends the trial court erred in not finding R.C. 313.19 void for vagueness. Second, he asserts the trial court erred in applying a “preponderance of the evidence” standard when reviewing his opinion concerning Joy Severt’s cause of death.”
Perez v. Cleveland, 613 N.E.2d 199 (Ohio 1993). · cites it 8דFor the reasons that follow, we hold that appellants have stated a cause of action under R.C. 313.19, and, therefore, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand this action for further proceedings.”
Cultrona v. Nationwide Life Ins., 936 F. Supp. 2d 832 (N.D. Ohio 2013). · cites it 14דIt Was Reasonable for the BAC to Rely Upon Ohio Rev.Code § 313.19 Rather than basing its denial upon one or more Ohio statutes setting limits on blood alcohol content with respect to performing specific activities, the BAC claims *847 to have relied on Ohio Rev.”
State v. Cousin, 449 N.E.2d 32 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 14דThe appellant’s argument in support of this position is predicated upon the wording of R.C. 313.19 which reads as follows: “The cause of death and the manner and mode in which the death occurred, as delivered by the coroner and incorporated in the coroner’s verdict and in the…”
State v. Maxwell, 2014 Ohio 1019 (Ohio 2014). · cites it 2ד” R.C. 313.19. If the cause and manner of death are not apparent—as when someone “dies as a result of criminal or other violent means, by casualty, by suicide, or in any suspicious or unusual manner” or “when any person * * * dies suddenly when in apparent good health,” R.”
McFarren v. Canton, 2016 Ohio 484 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4ד{¶96} R.C. §313.19 sets forth the presumptive value of a coroner’s determination as evidence in civil and criminal cases in which the cause, manner, and mode of death are at issue.”
Clay v. Galita, 2024 Ohio 833 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 9דAppellees filed a motion to dismiss the jury demand on grounds that the special statutory procedure outlined in R.C. 313.19, allowing judicial review of a coroner’s verdict, provides for a hearing before the common pleas court, but does not provide for a jury trial.”
State ex rel. Blair v. Balraj, 631 N.E.2d 1044 (Ohio 1994). · cites it 8ד19, stated: “The mode or manner can refer to the surrounding physical mechanisms associated with the death, as for example, the thrust of a knife, the course of a bullet or the blow of a blunt instrument. Such things are intimately associated with the causal chain leading to the…”
State v. Carter, 594 N.E.2d 595 (Ohio 1992). · cites it 2דSee R.C. 313.19. Bonnell further testified, without any defense objection: “Based upon my review of the medical records, Johnny Allen stopped breathing, and his heart stopped the day before he died, they got him going again, and the following day they did an examination that…”
State v. McFeeture, 2014 Ohio 5271 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6ד{¶112} Within this assignment of error, McFeeture also contends, citing R.C. 313.19, that the coroner did not utilize the proper mechanism for changing the manner of death.”
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.