The Fifth District reverses a 19-year wage-and-hour class action over improper judicial reference and flawed statistical sampling, reinforcing Duran’s rigorous requirements for misclassification class trials.
The Eighth District affirmed summary judgment for the seller and real estate agent in a residential sale dispute, holding that Ohio’s caveat emptor doctrine barred fraud claims where the buyer purchased a 108-year-old home as-is with an inspection contingency.
The Eighth District reversed judgment on the pleadings for the City of Cleveland, holding that the discovery rule applies to the two-year statute of limitations for political subdivision tort claims and that immunity questions cannot be resolved on the pleadings when the relevant facts are in dispute.
The Seventh District held that a Civ.R. 60(B) motion does not extend the appeal deadline under App.R. 4(B), even when captioned as a Civ.R. 59 motion, leaving five of six assignments of error challenging a custody modification beyond the court’s jurisdiction.
The Tenth District reversed the trial court’s dismissal of claims arising from a blind trust arrangement for real estate lots, holding that the plaintiff adequately alleged the existence of a trust relationship regardless of whether Ohio specifically codifies “blind trusts.”
The Tenth District affirmed the dismissal of a challenge to Ohio Department of Medicaid subrogation rights, holding that R.C. 5160.37 provides the exclusive administrative remedy and the common pleas court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
The Eighth District reversed in part and remanded a summary judgment dismissing claims that nieces with power of attorney improperly changed a decedent’s life insurance beneficiary, finding res judicata did not bar claims that were not previously litigated on the merits.
The Eighth District affirmed summary judgment for Winking Lizard Tavern and Cintas on a slip-and-fall claim, finding the floor mat hazard was open and obvious and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact on the attendant-circumstances exception.
The Eighth District dismissed an appeal from summary judgment because the trial court’s order did not dispose of all parties and lacked the required Civ.R. 54(B) no-just-reason-for-delay language.
In an en banc published opinion, the Commonwealth Court holds that Whistleblower Law claims against Commonwealth agencies fall within its exclusive original jurisdiction and are not subject to the Section 761(a)(1)(v) exception for tort-like actions, resolving the question with binding precedent for the first time.