Court Filings

The Eighth District Court of Appeals reviewed an administrative appeal by Dr. Joseph Badie Abdelmalak challenging the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court’s affirmation of the State Medical Board of Ohio’s revocation of his medical license and $20,000 fine. The appeals court upheld most rulings but found reversible error because the common pleas court failed to determine whether the Board’s order was supported by substantial evidence as required by R.C. 119.12(N). The court affirmed that the Board did not improperly shift the burden of proof and did not deny due process by admitting a two-page ombudsman excerpt, but remanded for the common pleas court to assess the substantial-evidence question.

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio’s orders adopting an independent auditor’s recommendations about the Power-Purchase-Agreement (PPA) Rider for AEP Ohio for 2018–2019. OCC and OMAEG argued the commission erred in finding the PPA Rider costs prudent, violated due process by denying a subpoena for a commission staff member, and applied the wrong standard for auditor independence. The Court held the commission reasonably credited evidence that a must-run strategy for OVEC coal units was prudent when chosen, that denial of the subpoena did not prejudice the parties because other witnesses covered the issues, and that the commission properly found no undue influence on the auditor.

The court dismissed H&S Investment Properties, LLC’s petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to force the Ashtabula County Auditor to change the owner name on the county tax list to match an affidavit recorded under R.C. 5301.252. The court held that the recorder’s affidavit statute does not itself create a right to change tax-roll entries and that the auditor’s duty under R.C. 319.28 is to compile the tax list, not to alter it based on a recorded affidavit. Because Relator cannot show a clear legal right or corresponding clear legal duty by the auditor, mandamus relief was unavailable and the petition was dismissed; the summary-judgment motion was denied as moot.

The Ohio Supreme Court held that Nationwide Energy Partners (NEP), a company that purchases electricity and resells it to apartment tenants using equipment it installs and maintains, is an "electric light company" and therefore a public utility subject to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO). The court concluded tenants qualify as "consumers" under R.C. 4905.03(C) and that NEP is plainly engaged in the business of supplying electricity because it buys power, sets resale prices, bills tenants, and may disconnect service. The Court reversed PUCO’s jurisdictional ruling and remanded for further proceedings on the remaining claims and tariff issues.

The Ohio Supreme Court granted a writ of mandamus ordering the Adams County Board of Elections to hold a hearing within ten days on Christopher Hicks’s October 3, 2025 challenge to Prosecuting Attorney Aaron Haslam’s voter registration. The court ruled that Hicks, a qualified Ohio elector, has statutory standing under R.C. 3503.24(A). It held that res judicata and issue preclusion do not bar this action because no prior quasi-judicial hearing adjudicated the residency issue. The board abused its discretion and clearly disregarded R.C. 3503.24(B) by denying the challenge without a hearing when its records were insufficient to resolve material factual disputes about residency.

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Sixth District Court of Appeals' dismissal of inmate Robert Bates’s mandamus complaint seeking the names of certain prison officers under the Public Records Act. The appellate court dismissed the case because Bates’s accompanying affidavit of prior civil actions did not strictly comply with R.C. 2969.25(A): he failed to list the name of each party to several prior lawsuits. The Supreme Court held that R.C. 2969.25(A) is mandatory, requires strict compliance, and permits sua sponte dismissal for noncompliance, so dismissal was proper and the merits were not reached.

The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the Tenth District and issued a limited writ directing the Industrial Commission to vacate its order and reconsider whether a nine-month Columbus City Schools speech therapist, who elected stretch pay but was not scheduled to work over the summer, was eligible for temporary-total-disability (TTD) benefits during the 2022 summer recess. The Court held the Commission failed to properly apply R.C. 4123.56(F), which requires assessment of whether an employee’s inability to work or wage loss is the direct result of an impairment from an allowed injury or instead the direct result of reasons unrelated to that injury. The case was remanded for the Commission to apply R.C. 4123.56(F) and determine eligibility.

The Ohio Supreme Court denied a mandamus petition by Jocelyn Rosnick (ACLU of Ohio) seeking contracts and related documents the Geauga County Sheriff’s Office allegedly executed with DHS, ICE, or the U.S. Marshals Service between June 1, 2024 and March 3, 2025. The sheriff’s office initially cited federal-law restrictions for denial but later submitted a records-clerk affidavit stating it did not execute any such contracts during that period. Because Rosnick failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that responsive records exist and were withheld, the court denied the writ and denied statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs. A motion to file late rebuttal evidence was also denied as untimely.

The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed a disciplinary complaint against Judge John W. Rudduck arising from his personal Facebook activity endorsing his son’s campaign and defending him online. The Board of Professional Conduct had found violations of several judicial-conduct rules and recommended a public reprimand, but the Court held that Jud.Cond.R. 4.1(A)(3) — the rule prohibiting judges from publicly endorsing candidates for other offices — is a content-based restriction on political speech that fails strict scrutiny and therefore violates the First Amendment. Because the finding under Jud.Cond.R. 1.2 relied on the invalidated rule, and the Court also found no violation of Jud.Cond.R. 1.3, the complaint was dismissed.

Kent Elastomer sought a refund of its 2018 workers’ compensation premium under the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation’s group-retrospective-rating program. The bureau denied the request because it had already issued a one-time COVID-19 dividend equal to 100% of each employer’s 2018 premium. The Tenth District issued a limited writ compelling the bureau to administer the group-retro program calculations for the 2018 policy year. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed, holding the bureau must follow the administrative rule governing the group-retro program and could not suspend those duties merely by issuing the dividend.