Litigation

This case addressed whether the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas had subject-matter jurisdiction to hear an administrative appeal from a removal order issued by the Ohio Department of Transportation. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal, holding that the Department was not an “agency” under R.C. 119 and its order was not an “adjudication” subject to appeal.

Plaintiff appealed the denial of her Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment after her negligence case was dismissed for failure to prosecute. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction due to untimely filing.

The appellate court vacated the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Cerreta Interiors, LLC and Northeast Ohio HVAC, LLC, finding that genuine issues of material fact remained regarding their alleged roles in contaminating a leased commercial space with crystalline silica dust. The case underscores the evidentiary requirements and limitations in determining liability for independent contractors and toxic exposure claims under Civ.R. 56.

This case involves a dispute over ownership and possession of a vehicle following the end of a personal relationship. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision denying the plaintiff’s replevin claim and affirming that the defendant was the rightful owner based on valid title and insufficient evidence of lawful transfer.

The Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed the trial court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration filed by a car dealership and its financing company, ruling that the arbitration agreements were not enforceable due to a lack of mutual assent. The case highlights the scrutiny courts apply to arbitration clauses in consumer contracts involving elderly or impaired individuals.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment that the defendant breached a contract with CommuteAir by resigning before completing the required training and commitment period, obligating him to repay a pre-employment bonus and attorney fees. The court also rejected the defendant’s arguments related to constructive discharge, Railway Labor Act preemption, and newly discovered evidence.

This case involves the reversal of a jury verdict in favor of the estate of a deceased child against Catholic Charities Corporation for negligent hiring, supervision, and training of its employee. The appellate court found multiple trial errors, including improper exclusion of expert testimony on causation and failure to properly consider a consent judgment, necessitating a new trial.

This case involved a dispute over attorney fees owed to a law firm by a client and his companies following a settlement in a racial discrimination lawsuit against McDonald’s. The appellate court affirmed a directed verdict on liability in quantum meruit for the corporate defendants but reversed the jury’s damages award as against the manifest weight of the evidence, remanding for a new trial on damages.

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that plaintiffs in medical-claim cases may use the 180-day extension under R.C. 2323.451(D) to add additional defendants without complying with Civ.R. 15(D), and that the extension is not limited to newly discovered defendants, thereby affirming the lower court’s reversal of a dismissal.