Court Filings

The appellate court reversed the trial court’s grant of leave allowing Kettering Medical Center (KHBMC) to amend its answer shortly before trial to assert immunity under R.C. 2305.51(B), and it reversed the trial court’s subsequent grant of summary judgment to KHBMC. The court held the trial court abused its discretion in permitting the last-minute amendment and reopening discovery because the amendment was untimely, unexplained, and prejudicial. The court also found genuine factual disputes existed about foreseeability, precautions taken, and whether the patient’s conduct constituted an explicit threat, so summary judgment on statutory immunity was improper.

The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the Ninth District and trial court, holding that NC Enterprises did not prove adverse possession of two narrow parcels owned by Norfolk Southern Railway. Although NC Enterprises performed regular lawn and landscape maintenance beginning in 1998 and later erected a fence and drainage in 2000 and 2011, the court concluded the required 21-year period must have begun on or before July 22, 1999. Maintenance alone before the fence was not open and notorious enough to put the title owner on constructive notice, so NC Enterprises failed to meet the open-and-notorious element by clear and convincing evidence.

The Ohio Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s grant of class certification in Stewart v. Farmers Insurance. The plaintiff insured’s vehicle was declared a total loss and Farmers invoked a court-ordered, binding appraisal provision in the policy. The appraisal produced a higher actual-cash-value award, which Farmers paid. The appellate court held that because the appraisal award resolved the plaintiff’s individual contract claim before class certification, the controversy was moot and the entire action — including class claims — had to be dismissed. The court declined to apply the “pick-off” exception because the payment resulted from an enforceable contractual appraisal, not a unilateral settlement tactic.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals, on remand from the Ohio Supreme Court, affirmed the trial court’s ruling that relators’ writ of mandamus alleging inverse condemnation against the City of Cleveland was not barred by the four-year statute of limitations. The court concluded the cause of action did not accrue until the airport runway expansion at issue was completed in August 2004, because that completion was when all events fixing Cleveland’s alleged liability occurred. Because the relators filed their mandamus petition on August 1, 2008, the court held the action was timely and remanded the case for further proceedings on the merits of the taking claim.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Euclid Municipal Court’s denial of Malik Dahdouh’s last-minute motion to continue a small-claims trial. The case arose after the plaintiff sued for vehicle damage; the trial was scheduled within the 40-day small-claims deadline. Dahdouh filed a pro se continuance request the day before trial, citing overseas travel, which the magistrate denied. The appellate court held the trial court properly applied the factors governing continuances (including statutory timing, delay length, prejudice to the plaintiff, and the defendant’s contribution to the delay) and did not abuse its discretion in refusing the continuance.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for Dr. Anthony Gingo in his defamation suit against Jane Hanak based on a Yelp review. The appellate court held the challenged statements were false, defamatory per se, and not protected by any qualified privilege; damages (total $245,000, including $145,000 compensatory and $100,000 punitive) and attorney fees were upheld after a hearing. The court also affirmed the trial court’s prior designation of Hanak as a vexatious litigator. The ruling rests on undisputed admissions, admissible record evidence, and the conclusion that the statements alleged criminal conduct and attacks on professional reputation.

The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Shawn Hamilton's negligence and intentional-tort claims against Ameristone, American Countertops, and employee Noah Troyer. Hamilton was injured at work and sued for negligence, negligence per se, and under Ohio's intentional-tort statute. The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings and denied leave to amend because the complaint did not allege deliberate intent to injure, and the employers were covered by the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation. The appellate court agreed that the pleadings failed to state an actionable intentional-tort claim and affirmed.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the Cicorettis’ complaint against A&M Total Restoration. The Cicorettis repeatedly filed complaints captioned as breach of contract but pleaded only negligent, defective, and unworkmanlike performance and failed to attach a written contract or adequately plead contract terms as required by Civ.R. 10(D). The appellate court agreed the complaint failed to state a cognizable breach claim and that negligence/oral-contract claims were time-barred, so dismissal under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) was proper.

The First District Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded consolidated medical-malpractice and related tort judgments against Dr. Abubakar Durrani and the Center for Advanced Spine Technologies. The jury had found for three plaintiffs on negligence, lack of informed consent, battery, and fraud and awarded compensatory and punitive damages. The court held consolidation was proper, expert testimony and jury instructions were allowable, and prejudgment interest was properly awarded; but it vacated the awards for future medical expenses as unsupported and remanded to calculate statutory setoffs against plaintiffs’ settlements with other tortfeasors.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Ryan Karr's pro se complaint against the Estate of Dianna Sayre and Joseph Aaron Sayre. Karr had alleged perjury, abuse of a disabled person, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and other misconduct tied to a prior CPO proceeding, but his nine-page complaint failed to plead distinct causes of action, facts, dates, or the elements required to give defendants adequate notice. The appellate court held the complaint did not satisfy Civ.R. 8(A) and affirmed dismissal under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), noting Karr also failed to meaningfully brief his assignments of error on appeal.

The Ohio Fourth District Court of Appeals reviewed a bench trial where Yangtze Railroad Fasteners sued Ohio Valley Trackwork (OVT) for breach of contract and unjust enrichment over about $40,000 for delivered railroad materials. The court found Yangtze proved the contract and delivery, but the trial court had concluded OVT was not liable because payment was misdirected to a third party after fraudulent email instructions. The appeals court held the trial court’s decision on breach of contract was against the manifest weight of the evidence, reversed that portion, and remanded for further proceedings while affirming the unjust enrichment judgment portion not appealed.

The Clermont County Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment for homeowners Vernon and Meredith Hubbard in a home-remodeling dispute. The Hubbards had obtained a $108,000 judgment against TFB Development, LLC and two individuals, Lenny (Leonard) Weber and Sandra Davis. The appellate court held the Hubbards did not produce admissible summary-judgment evidence showing Weber or Davis were parties to the written contract or otherwise individually liable, because the contract identified TFB (not the individuals) as the contractor and contained an integration clause. The case is remanded for further proceedings.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals reviewed a default-judgment ruling in a bailment case where Mahadev Logistics claimed Columbus Truck & Equipment failed to safeguard and return a 2015 Volvo truck after it was stolen from the repair facility. The trial court found breach and awarded only $1,447.94 for increased repair costs, denying towing, storage, replacement-key, and lost-profit claims. The appellate court affirmed liability but reversed the damages ruling in part, finding insufficient evidence to support the trial court's limited calculation and remanding for a hearing to quantify repair- and towing-related damages while rejecting lost-profit and most storage claims.

The court affirmed the Sandusky Municipal Court’s August 20, 2025 judgment denying Shardaye Smith’s motion for relief from judgment under Ohio Civil Rule 60(B). LVNV Funding obtained summary judgment in a small-claims-style collection action after serving process by certified mail to the address on Smith’s account. Smith later sought relief, claiming defective service, lack of jurisdiction, and invalid evidentiary foundation; the magistrate and trial court found she was properly served, had notice (as shown by an earlier filing contesting jurisdiction), failed to show a meritorious defense, and filed her motion untimely. The appellate court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief and affirmed.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Tajul Islam’s motion to continue a domestic-relations hearing and related rulings. Islam’s counsel was unavailable due to a criminal trial and Islam argued this denied him counsel and due process when the hearing proceeded in his absence. The appellate court found the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the late continuance request, that no constitutional right to counsel existed in this civil contempt/post-decree proceeding, and that Islam failed to show cumulative error or timely objections. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s judgment terminating Mother’s parental rights and awarding permanent custody of twin infants A.N. and L.N. to Cuyahoga County Division of Children and Family Services (CCDCFS). The agency had sought permanent custody in its original complaint after the children were removed at birth because of Mother’s unresolved mental-health problems, inconsistent engagement with services, and prior involuntary termination of parental rights to older siblings. The appellate court found the juvenile court’s findings supported by clear and convincing evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

The Ohio appellate court reversed the trial court’s denial of the City of Euclid’s motion to dismiss a negligence complaint. Frederico sued the city after a tree fell from private property onto his car, alleging the city owned and failed to maintain the tree. The appellate panel held that under Ohio law the city is generally immune from tort liability unless an exception applies, and the complaint did not plead facts showing the tree was an “obstruction” on the roadway as required to overcome immunity. Because the complaint could not state a viable exception, dismissal was required.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s award of attorney fees to Citywide RX after Citywide prevailed on contract claims against multiple nursing-home defendants, including Selfridge Leasing. Citywide sought $434,252.95 in fees (primarily for a New York law firm plus local counsel); the trial court found Citywide the prevailing party under the contract’s fee provision, reviewed affidavits and itemized bills, and held the rates and hours reasonable. On appeal Selfridge argued the fees were excessive and duplicative, but the court rejected new arguments raised for the first time on appeal and found no genuine issue of material fact.

The Ohio Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Pike County Common Pleas Court's denial of a motion to set aside a sheriff's sale of real property sold for delinquent taxes. Gary Damron argued he (and other known heirs) did not receive proper notice because the Notice of Sale was sent by email to his then-attorney during the holiday period rather than by regular mail. The appellate court held service on Damron's attorney by e-mail complied with Civ.R. 5(B)(2)(f), was complete upon transmission, and was reasonably calculated to provide notice, so the trial court did not err in denying the motion to set aside the sale.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals reviewed a summary judgment the Summit County Common Pleas Court granted to defendants Mike and Janine Brustoski against plaintiff Nahas Construction. The trial court deemed Nahas’s responses to requests for admission admitted after Nahas missed the discovery deadline, and then granted summary judgment finding Nahas breached the construction contract and the Brustoskis were justified in withholding final payment. The appeals court affirmed that breach was established by the admitted facts but reversed as to the damages award, finding the Brustoskis failed to present competent evidence of the amount of damages and remanded for a determination of damages.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Steubenville Municipal Court's August 5, 2025 judgment awarding plaintiff-appellant Sol Rose III $683.50 plus 8% interest for conversion of personal property by Jefferson Behavioral Health System (J.B.H.S.) after its employee, Lou Stein, entered and discarded items from Rose’s unit. The trial court found Stein acted within the scope of his employment but without malice, so J.B.H.S. was liable under respondeat superior while Stein faced no individual or punitive damages. The court declined to award compensation for the decedent daughter’s urn and ashes because sentimental value is speculative and no market value testimony was offered.

The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Richland County Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division judgment that denied Heidi Back’s objections to a magistrate’s child support decision. The magistrate had designated Back the child-support obligor and ordered monthly support of $221.50. Back argued she was rushed at the July 24, 2025 hearing and prevented from presenting evidence about her inability to work and financial situation. The appellate court found she was sworn, had the chance to testify, was asked at the close if she had more to present, and did not provide the additional evidence at the hearing, so the trial court did not err in adopting the magistrate’s decision.

The Tenth District Court of Appeals reversed the Court of Claims’ grant of summary judgment for the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation (BWC). The dispute concerned whether a $120 fee for an independent medical reviewer that BWC included in its subrogation demand was released by a prior settlement. The appellate court held the settlement’s release of subrogation rights did not bar Thomas’s claim for reimbursement because the fee was not part of the statutory subrogation interest and BWC was statutorily required to pay costs of medical reviews itself. The case is remanded for further proceedings.

The Court of Appeals denied Thomas Jones’ request for a writ of mandamus seeking to force Judge Lisa L. Sadler to serve him with an entry of dismissal and to rescind a bill for court costs. The court adopted the magistrate’s decision and granted the respondent’s motion to dismiss, finding that the duty to serve judgment and note service on the docket lies with the clerk of court under Civ.R. 58(B), not with the judge. The court also held Jones has an adequate remedy at law (e.g., Civ.R. 60(B) or appeal) and thus cannot meet mandamus requirements.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. The appeal challenged (1) the municipal court’s grant of leave to amend a counterclaim and transfer to common pleas court, (2) the common pleas court’s grant of additional time under Civ.R. 56(F) for discovery, and (3) denial of plaintiff-appellant Castro’s motion for summary judgment. The appellate court held the municipal court properly transferred the case because the amended counterclaim exceeded its $15,000 jurisdictional limit, the trial court did not abuse discretion in granting a Civ.R. 56(F) continuance, and genuine disputes of material fact (about the terms and performance of an oral agreement concerning sewer-line work) precluded summary judgment.

The Twelfth District Court of Appeals dismissed Nicole Potts' appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Potts had challenged a municipal-court order that adopted a magistrate's decision dismissing a landlord's forcible entry and detainer action against her. The magistrate dismissed the action without prejudice, finding Potts' purported "lifelong lease" defective and that the landlord's notice to vacate was defective. The appellate court held the municipal order was not a final appealable order under R.C. 2505.02 because the dismissal without prejudice left the parties in the same position as before the suit and did not affect Potts' substantial rights.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Portage County Court of Common Pleas judgment for plaintiff Fred Molai against the Standing Rock Cemetery Board of Trustees. After a jury awarded Molai $10,000 for breach of contract and $90,000 for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the trial court refused to instruct the jury on punitive damages and attorney fees based on R.C. 2744.05(A). The appellate court held Molai waived a facial constitutional challenge by not raising it below and found the statutory prohibition on punitive damages applicable to this public cemetery, so exclusion of that instruction was not an abuse of discretion.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Kirtland Country Club (KCC) in a suit by Sandy and Kevin Donovan challenging noise from KCC’s skeet shooting range. The Donovans alleged nuisance and negligence based on loud gunfire; KCC argued it was immune under R.C. 1533.85 because it substantially complied with the Division of Wildlife noise rules (Ohio Adm.Code 1501:31-29-03) and had a conditional use permit. The court held the statutory immunity and compliance with the administrative noise standard defeated the claims and found no genuine issue of negligence, so summary judgment for KCC was affirmed.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Logan County Common Pleas Court's dismissal of Jeremy L. Larrick’s appeal of a workers’ compensation denial. Larrick appealed the Industrial Commission’s refusal to allow him to participate in the state fund after the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation denied his claim. The trial court ordered a more definite statement and dismissed his R.C. 4123.512 complaint because he never identified specific medical conditions that had been presented to the Commission. The appeals court held a claimant must identify the specific conditions raised administratively to proceed in common pleas court.

The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Stark County Probate Court’s finding that attorney Gerald B. Golub was in indirect civil contempt for failing to return $43,560 he paid himself in attorney fees from four related estates without prior probate-court approval. The appellate court held the contempt finding was proper because the May 15, 2024 order requiring return of the fees had been previously affirmed and disallowed for further review, and Golub made no effort to comply or seek court approval or other relief. The court concluded the probate judge did not abuse her discretion and that coercive remedies (periodic payments, execution) were appropriate.