Court Filings

The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s award of legal custody of two-year-old D.W. to the child’s paternal grandmother and her partner. The juvenile court had previously adjudicated D.W. dependent and placed the child in temporary custody after concerns about Mother’s methamphetamine use, unstable housing, and association with a drug-using boyfriend. The appellate court found the record shows Mother failed to comply with her case plan (substance use and mental health treatment, drug screens, and housing stability), while custodians provided a stable, supportive home and facilitated parental visitation. The court concluded the award was supported by the greater weight of the evidence and was in the child’s best interest.

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Twelfth District Court of Appeals’ dismissal of Ramone Wright’s mandamus petition asking the Madison County Municipal Court to vacate a prior traffic conviction. Wright argued he could not have committed the traffic offense because he was allegedly jailed on another matter at the time, and said his time to appeal had passed. The Supreme Court held Wright had an adequate remedy at law—direct appeal or postconviction procedures—and therefore mandamus was not available. The municipal court’s motion to dismiss the appeal was denied as procedurally improper but its brief was considered on the merits.

The Twelfth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court's denial of Mother's petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking return of four children removed to protective custody. The children were adjudicated in juvenile court after a May 31, 2023 shelter-care removal; Mother later revoked consent to a proposed legal custody transfer and pursued various postjudgment motions and appeals. The juvenile court denied habeas relief because Mother had an adequate remedy at law (a motion for further disposition and appeals) and the lack of notice of the initial shelter-care hearing did not strip the juvenile court of jurisdiction. The appellate court found no reversible error.

The Ohio Supreme Court accepted the resignation of attorney David Paul Greulich Jr. under the rule for resignation when disciplinary action is pending. The court treated the filing as a resignation with disciplinary action pending and ordered that Greulich be immediately prohibited from practicing law in Ohio, surrender his admission certificate, and have his name stricken from the roll. The court also imposed post-resignation obligations: notify clients and opposing counsel, deliver client files, refund unearned fees, refrain from handling client funds, reimburse the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection if applicable, and file proof of compliance with the court and disciplinary counsel.

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Tenth District Court of Appeals' dismissal of Ramone Wright’s petition for a writ of mandamus against the Franklin County Municipal Court Clerk. Wright sought to compel the clerk to vacate an allegedly unconstitutional 2009 municipal-court conviction based on an apparent error in the judgment entry. The court held that Wright failed to state a mandamus claim because he did not show a clear legal right to vacatur, the clerk had no clear legal duty to vacate the judgment, and Wright had an adequate remedy by appeal. A separate request for judgment was denied as moot.

The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary proceedings against attorney Javier Horacio Armengau arising from his criminal convictions for rape, kidnapping, gross sexual imposition, sexual battery, and a misdemeanor public indecency. The Board of Professional Conduct had found those convictions established violations of professional-conduct rules and recommended permanent disbarment. The court rejected Armengau’s objections — including attempts to relitigate his criminal convictions, to introduce a polygraph, and to rely on character evidence — and held certified convictions are conclusive in disciplinary matters. The court adopted the board’s findings and permanently disbarred Armengau to protect the public and preserve professional integrity.

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Tenth District Court of Appeals’ dismissal of inmate Patrick O. Stokes’s mandamus action seeking copies of an electronic kite and its response. Stokes filed the action against A. Combs but, in the affidavit required by R.C. 2969.25(A), failed to provide the case numbers for three appeals he said he filed within the prior five years. The court held that the statute requires strict compliance and that an inmate must list and describe all civil actions and appeals filed in the previous five years, including their case numbers, so dismissal was proper.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Lorain County Common Pleas Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Nancy Vega, holding she is entitled to participate in the Ohio workers’ compensation system. Vega fell at work and injured her shoulder; the court concluded her fall was an “unexplained fall” under Waller v. Mayfield, meaning it arose from a neutral risk tied to the workplace. Because Vega eliminated idiopathic (personal) causes and there was no evidence of a non-employment cause, an inference arose that the injury was work-related. The BWC forfeited its challenge by not participating in initial briefing.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s dispositions adjudicating R.G. and R.C. juvenile traffic offenders. Both juveniles challenged the denial of motions to suppress statements they made to police without receiving Miranda warnings. The appellate court concluded the encounters occurred at the juveniles’ workplace, were brief and unrestrained, and did not involve physical restraint, threats, or coercive tactics; therefore the questioning was not custodial and Miranda warnings were not required. The court also found the statements were voluntary under the totality of the circumstances.