Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 3901
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3901.051 (2026)

Assistant superintendent - duties

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
September 9, 1957
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 312 - 102nd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

The assistant superintendents shall perform such duties of the superintendent and such other duties as the superintendent shall direct.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: Pirkel v. Pirkel, 2014 Ohio 4327 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pirkel v. Pirkel, 2014 Ohio 4327 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Having reviewed the evidence from the hearing in light of the factors set forth in R.C. 3901.051(D), as well as the in camera interviews with the children, the trial court concluded that it was in their best interest to have expanded parenting time phased in gradually.”
Robinson v. Rummelhoff, 2014 Ohio 1461 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “Appellant has provided no authority for the proposition that R.C. 3901.051(K) requires a separate hearing on the amount of attorney fees.”
Lingar v. Landel, 2020 Ohio 136 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “{¶ 25} Appellee argues that the trial court properly considered the factors in R.C. 3901.051 and made a decision that was not unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable.”
M.T.O. v. A.O., 2026 Ohio 454 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). “’s motion to intervene under R.C. 3901.051(B)(1) because Ohio’s adoption statute, R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3901.051(B)(1) — 1 case
M.T.O. v. A.O., 2026 Ohio 454 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). “’s motion to intervene under R.C. 3901.051(B)(1) because Ohio’s adoption statute, R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3901.051(D) — 1 case
Pirkel v. Pirkel, 2014 Ohio 4327 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “Having reviewed the evidence from the hearing in light of the factors set forth in R.C. 3901.051(D), as well as the in camera interviews with the children, the trial court concluded that it was in their best interest to have expanded parenting time phased in gradually.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3901.051(F)(2) — 1 case
Pirkel v. Pirkel, 2014 Ohio 4327 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “Having reviewed the evidence from the hearing in light of the factors set forth in R.C. 3901.051(D), as well as the in camera interviews with the children, the trial court concluded that it was in their best interest to have expanded parenting time phased in gradually.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3901.051(K) — 1 case
Robinson v. Rummelhoff, 2014 Ohio 1461 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “Appellant has provided no authority for the proposition that R.C. 3901.051(K) requires a separate hearing on the amount of attorney fees.”
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.