The Ninth District reversed in part a discovery order compelling disclosure of oil and gas drilling strategies, finding that the trial court failed to consider supplemental trade secret evidence and remanding for a protective order.
The Ninth District partially reversed a criminal trespass conviction, holding that a represented defendant’s pro se motions did not toll the statutory speedy trial clock and remanding for a determination of whether the State violated the 45-day time limit.
The Ninth District affirmed the denial of a Civ.R. 60(B) motion to set aside a five-year domestic violence civil protection order, finding that the respondent’s untimely motion and failure to update his address with the court defeated his claim of lack of notice.
The Ninth District affirmed a small claims judgment for a restoration company, holding that the defendant waived her Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b) objection by failing to request findings of fact from the magistrate and that the contractual one-year limitation provision was properly rejected.
The Ninth District reversed the trial court’s modification of a spousal support termination date, holding that after a reversal and remand, the original pending motion need not be refiled, and the trial court cannot impose new procedural requirements that did not exist before the appeal.
The Ninth District reversed summary judgment for a property owner in a sidewalk fall case, holding that the open-and-obvious doctrine does not override negligence per se based on a municipal ordinance requiring sidewalk maintenance, and that the plaintiff’s statement about tripping was admissible as an excited utterance.
The Ninth District affirmed a $3 million cognovit judgment, holding that Civ.R. 60(B) relief from judgment was unavailable where the original judgment was not yet final due to unresolved attorney fees, and that Civ.R. 54(B) reconsideration was properly denied.
The Ninth District reversed in part a partition case, holding that the trial court erred in scheduling a bench trial when a valid jury demand had been filed, while affirming the denial of multiple continuance requests and the denial of leave to amend the complaint.
The Ninth District affirmed sanctions under R.C. 2323.51 against homebuyers and their attorney for filing a frivolous motion to vacate an arbitration award using a ‘manifest disregard of the law’ standard that Ohio no longer recognizes.
The Ninth District affirmed the removal of an ancillary estate administrator who had a conflict of interest, holding that his failure to file objections to the magistrate’s decision under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iv) forfeited all appellate arguments except plain error, which he did not argue.