Case Caption

Case No.Topics and IssuesAuthorDecided
Fannie Mae v. Hicks 103804Foreclosure; reversal of judgment; R.C. 2325.03; R.C. 2329.45; restitution; Civ.R. 60(B); relief from judgment; title; third-party purchaser; plaintiff purchaser. The trial court erred in granting restitution under R.C. 2329.45 to former title holder/debtor upon reversal of the foreclosure order following the judicial sale and confirmation when the purchaser was not a third-party purchaser but was the plaintiff to the foreclosure action. Trial court had no discretion to decide plaintiff's Civ.R. 60(B) motion to vacate the confirmation of sale, as the confirmation is vacated by operation of law upon the reversal of the judgment in foreclosure.Stewart 12/29/2016
State ex rel. Dept. of Edn. v. Ministerial Day Care 103685Summary judgment; Civ.R. 56(C); res judicata; disputed issue of fact. Trial court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiff's claim to recover public funds. Res judicata did not bar plaintiff's claim; doctrine does not bar a subsequent action between the same parties when the facts giving rise to the second action were not in existence at the time of the commencement of the first action. Given the absence of any Civ.R. 56 evidence rebutting plaintiff's claim, no genuine issue of material fact exists that would have rendered summary judgment inappropriate.Boyle 12/29/2016
State v. Gregory 104038, 104039, 104040Consecutive sentence; findings; record; R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); clearly and convincingly; seriousness; disproportionate; contrary to law; R.C. 2953.08(G)(2). There was no error in imposing consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) because the trial court carefully weighed the seriousness of defendant's conduct and the danger he posed to the public against the consecutive service of his sentences. Defendant has failed to demonstrate that the record in this case clearly and convincingly does not support the trial court's R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings.Gallagher 12/29/2016
Adams v. 1365 E. Blvd. Corp. 104089 & 104126Manifest weight; judgment; damages; repairs; maintenance; competent; credible; abuse of discretion; record; trial. The trial court's judgment awarding offsetting damages to plaintiff and the defendant was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.Gallagher 12/29/2016
State v. Bolden 104227 Sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence, stealth, motor vehicle, effective assistance of counsel. Defendant's convictions for aggravated burglary and burglary were supported by sufficient evidence when the testimony at trial revealed the defendant used stealth to remain in the residence. Defendant's conviction for felonious assault were not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the trial testimony proved that but for the victim's action of moving out of the path of the motor vehicle, the victim would have been struck. Finally, counsel's failure to object to hearsay testimony was not sufficiently prejudicial to affect the outcome of trial.Keough 12/29/2016
Hornyak v. Res. Alloys, L.L.C. 104302Motion for summary judgment; Civ.R. 56; workers' compensation; employer immunity; coemployee immunity; "borrowed employee"; agreement with temporary agency. Judgment reversed. The trial court erred by granting defendants' motion for summary judgment when genuine issues of material fact remained. A review of the record revealed a conflict as to whether the company where plaintiff worked was the employer who contracted with the temporary agency and paid the workers' compensation premiums. This conflict, along with the unknown corporate relationship between the company and other corporate-related defendants, created a genuine issue of material fact.Kilbane 12/29/2016
In re R.T. 104369Parental rights; termination; permanent custody; best interest; R.C. 2151.414; R.C. 2151.413; case plan; utilities; special needs; adoption; foster parents; relatives; temporary custody; emergency custody. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding permanent custody of minor child to CCDCFS when there was competent and credible evidence in the record to support the court's decision. There was clear and convincing evidence that the child had been in the temporary custody of the county agency for 12 out of a consecutive 22-month period, and that a least one factor in R.C. 2151.414(D)(1) supported the finding that an award of permanent custody was in the child's best interest.Stewart 12/29/2016
Thomas v. Laws 104710Contract; interest; statutory interest; complete record; default judgment; evidence; damages; post-judgment interest. Court's award of money damages in default judgment was not against manifest weight of the evidence where record was devoid of transcript or other evidence contradicting the court's damage award. Court's award of post-judgment interest at statutory rate was error where parties agreed to an applicable interest rate in their agreement.Gallagher 12/29/2016