Log In
  • US
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Supreme Court
  • High Courts
    All High Courts
    Allahabad High Court
    Andhra Pradesh High Court
    Bombay High Court
    Calcutta High Court
    Chhattisgarh High Court
    Delhi High Court
    Gauhati High Court
    Gujarat High Court
    Himachal Pradesh High Court
    Jammu and Kashmir High Court
    Jharkhand High Court
    Karnataka High Court
    Kerala High Court
    Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Madras High Court
    Manipur High Court
    Meghalaya High Court
    Orissa High Court
    Patna High Court
    Punjab & Haryana High Court
    Rajasthan High Court
    Sikkim High Court
    Telangana High Court
    Tripura High Court
    Uttarakhand High Court
Log In Sign Up India Judgments
  • US
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments

Ohio Case Commentaries

Official Release and Oath Administration for the July 2025 Ohio Bar Examination: Non‑Precedential Administrative Action of the Supreme Court of Ohio

Official Release and Oath Administration for the July 2025 Ohio Bar Examination: Non‑Precedential Administrative Action of the Supreme Court of Ohio

Date: Oct 30, 2025
Official Release and Oath Administration for the July 2025 Ohio Bar Examination: Non‑Precedential Administrative Action of the Supreme Court of Ohio Introduction In 2025-Ohio-4877 (Administrative...
Parisi Left Intact for Now: Mandamus Dismissed Without Opinion While Chief Justice Kennedy Calls to Restore Public Records Act Control Over Court Records and Apply H.B. 265’s Affirmation Requirement

Parisi Left Intact for Now: Mandamus Dismissed Without Opinion While Chief Justice Kennedy Calls to Restore Public Records Act Control Over Court Records and Apply H.B. 265’s Affirmation Requirement

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Parisi Left Intact for Now: Mandamus Dismissed Without Opinion While Chief Justice Kennedy Calls to Restore Public Records Act Control Over Court Records and Apply H.B. 265’s Affirmation Requirement...
Enhanced Actual Suspension for Violent Threats Absent Mental-Health Mitigation: Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies Sanctioning in Attorney Discipline

Enhanced Actual Suspension for Violent Threats Absent Mental-Health Mitigation: Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies Sanctioning in Attorney Discipline

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Enhanced Actual Suspension for Violent Threats Absent Mental-Health Mitigation: Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies Sanctioning in Attorney Discipline Introduction In Disciplinary Counsel v. Taylor, Slip...
Clarifying “Additional Defendants” in Ohio Medical-Claim Actions: No Civ.R. 15(D) Compliance Needed and 180-Day Extension Not Limited to Newly Discovered Parties (Lewis v. MedCentral Health Sys.)

Clarifying “Additional Defendants” in Ohio Medical-Claim Actions: No Civ.R. 15(D) Compliance Needed and 180-Day Extension Not Limited to Newly Discovered Parties (Lewis v. MedCentral Health Sys.)

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Clarifying “Additional Defendants” in Ohio Medical-Claim Actions: No Civ.R. 15(D) Compliance Needed and 180-Day Extension Not Limited to Newly Discovered Parties Case: Lewis v. MedCentral Health...
Strict, Contemporaneous Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(A) Is Required; Noncompliance Requires Dismissal Without Prejudice and Cannot Be Cured by Later Amendment

Strict, Contemporaneous Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(A) Is Required; Noncompliance Requires Dismissal Without Prejudice and Cannot Be Cured by Later Amendment

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Strict, Contemporaneous Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(A) Is Required; Noncompliance Requires Dismissal Without Prejudice and Cannot Be Cured by Later Amendment Introduction In State ex rel. Mason v....
Rigorous Gatekeeping of Extraordinary Writs and the Court’s Use of Alternative Writs under S.Ct.Prac.R. 12.04 and 12.05: Analysis of the Supreme Court of Ohio’s October 22, 2025 Case Announcements

Rigorous Gatekeeping of Extraordinary Writs and the Court’s Use of Alternative Writs under S.Ct.Prac.R. 12.04 and 12.05: Analysis of the Supreme Court of Ohio’s October 22, 2025 Case Announcements

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Rigorous Gatekeeping of Extraordinary Writs and the Court’s Use of Alternative Writs under S.Ct.Prac.R. 12.04 and 12.05: Analysis of the Supreme Court of Ohio’s October 22, 2025 Case Announcements...
Only the Office of Disciplinary Counsel May Invoke Reciprocal Discipline in Ohio; Court Flags Risks of Mandatory Reciprocity During Pending Ohio Appeals

Only the Office of Disciplinary Counsel May Invoke Reciprocal Discipline in Ohio; Court Flags Risks of Mandatory Reciprocity During Pending Ohio Appeals

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Only the Office of Disciplinary Counsel May Invoke Reciprocal Discipline in Ohio; Court Flags Risks of Mandatory Reciprocity During Pending Ohio Appeals Introduction In 10/22/2025 Case Announcements...
Whole-Record Review of Juror Bias Permits Reliance on Group Voir Dire Responses: State v. Rogers (2025-Ohio-4794)

Whole-Record Review of Juror Bias Permits Reliance on Group Voir Dire Responses: State v. Rogers (2025-Ohio-4794)

Date: Oct 24, 2025
Whole-Record Review of Juror Bias Permits Reliance on Group Voir Dire Responses Commentary on State v. Rogers, 2025-Ohio-4794 (Supreme Court of Ohio) Introduction In State v. Rogers, the Supreme...
Prospective Application of Amended S.Ct.Prac.R. 4.03(A) and Strict Limits on Habeas Relief Reaffirmed: Gordon v. Smith

Prospective Application of Amended S.Ct.Prac.R. 4.03(A) and Strict Limits on Habeas Relief Reaffirmed: Gordon v. Smith

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Prospective Application of Amended S.Ct.Prac.R. 4.03(A) and Strict Limits on Habeas Relief Reaffirmed: Gordon v. Smith Introduction In Gordon v. Smith, 2025-Ohio-4768, the Supreme Court of Ohio...
Strict, Time-of-Filing Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(A): No Post-Filing Cure via Updated Affidavits or Civ.R. 15 in State ex rel. Harris v. Schwendeman

Strict, Time-of-Filing Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(A): No Post-Filing Cure via Updated Affidavits or Civ.R. 15 in State ex rel. Harris v. Schwendeman

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Strict, Time-of-Filing Compliance with R.C. 2969.25(A): No Post-Filing Cure via Updated Affidavits or Civ.R. 15 Introduction In State ex rel. Harris v. Schwendeman, Slip Opinion No. 2025-Ohio-4769,...
Explicit Pleading Required: Generic "Failure to State a Claim" Does Not Preserve R.C. 2744 Political-Subdivision Immunity; Late Amendments May Be Denied for Unjustified, Prejudicial Delay

Explicit Pleading Required: Generic "Failure to State a Claim" Does Not Preserve R.C. 2744 Political-Subdivision Immunity; Late Amendments May Be Denied for Unjustified, Prejudicial Delay

Date: Oct 18, 2025
Explicit Pleading Required: Generic "Failure to State a Claim" Does Not Preserve R.C. 2744 Political-Subdivision Immunity; Late Amendments May Be Denied for Unjustified, Prejudicial Delay...
Finality Is Factual, Not Legal: Ohio Supreme Court Ends Deference to Industrial Commission’s Legal Interpretations of VSSR Rules and Clarifies “Other Heavy Objects” Under Adm.Code 4123:1-3-13(E)(7)

Finality Is Factual, Not Legal: Ohio Supreme Court Ends Deference to Industrial Commission’s Legal Interpretations of VSSR Rules and Clarifies “Other Heavy Objects” Under Adm.Code 4123:1-3-13(E)(7)

Date: Oct 18, 2025
Finality Is Factual, Not Legal: Ohio Supreme Court Ends Deference to Industrial Commission’s Legal Interpretations of VSSR Rules and Clarifies “Other Heavy Objects” Under Adm.Code 4123:1-3-13(E)(7)...
Ohio Supreme Court Caps Clerk Technology Fee at $1 Total Per Service for “Complete Record” Charges, Not Per Page

Ohio Supreme Court Caps Clerk Technology Fee at $1 Total Per Service for “Complete Record” Charges, Not Per Page

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Ohio Supreme Court Caps Clerk Technology Fee at $1 Total Per Service for “Complete Record” Charges, Not Per Page Case: State ex rel. Gault v. Medina County Court of Common Pleas Clerk, Slip Opinion...
Timeliness Is for the Arbitrator: Ohio Supreme Court Bars Employer Self‑Help on Arbitration Deadlines and Requires SERB to Explain ULP Dismissals

Timeliness Is for the Arbitrator: Ohio Supreme Court Bars Employer Self‑Help on Arbitration Deadlines and Requires SERB to Explain ULP Dismissals

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Timeliness Is for the Arbitrator: Ohio Supreme Court Bars Employer Self‑Help on Arbitration Deadlines and Requires SERB to Explain ULP Dismissals Introduction In State ex rel. Staple v. State...
No duty to convert or supply proprietary software for cellphone extractions under Ohio’s Public Records Act: State ex rel. Castellon v. Maloney

No duty to convert or supply proprietary software for cellphone extractions under Ohio’s Public Records Act: State ex rel. Castellon v. Maloney

Date: Oct 16, 2025
No duty to convert or supply proprietary software for cellphone extractions under Ohio’s Public Records Act Commentary on State ex rel. Castellon v. Maloney, Slip Opinion No. 2025-Ohio-4687 (Supreme...
Snodgrass v. Trumbull Corr. Inst.: Conclusory Affidavits Cannot Sustain Law‑Enforcement or Security Exemptions—Prison Device and Disciplinary Records Are Disclosable Absent Specific Proof

Snodgrass v. Trumbull Corr. Inst.: Conclusory Affidavits Cannot Sustain Law‑Enforcement or Security Exemptions—Prison Device and Disciplinary Records Are Disclosable Absent Specific Proof

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Snodgrass v. Trumbull Corr. Inst.: Conclusory Affidavits Cannot Sustain Law‑Enforcement or Security Exemptions—Prison Device and Disciplinary Records Are Disclosable Absent Specific Proof...
Visiting-Judge Assignment Irregularities Render Judgments Voidable, Not Void: Ohio Supreme Court Reaffirms Limits of Habeas in Lowe v. Smith

Visiting-Judge Assignment Irregularities Render Judgments Voidable, Not Void: Ohio Supreme Court Reaffirms Limits of Habeas in Lowe v. Smith

Date: Oct 9, 2025
Visiting-Judge Assignment Irregularities Render Judgments Voidable, Not Void: Ohio Supreme Court Reaffirms Limits of Habeas in Lowe v. Smith Case: Lowe v. Smith, Warden, Slip Opinion No....
Commutation Is Not a New Judgment: Ohio Supreme Court Confirms Governor’s Power to Substitute LWOP for Death Without Ex Post Facto Implications

Commutation Is Not a New Judgment: Ohio Supreme Court Confirms Governor’s Power to Substitute LWOP for Death Without Ex Post Facto Implications

Date: Oct 9, 2025
Commutation Is Not a New Judgment: Ohio Supreme Court Confirms Governor’s Power to Substitute LWOP for Death Without Ex Post Facto Implications Case: State ex rel. Hawkins v. Frederick, Slip Opinion...
Pleading Matters in Election Mandamus: Generic “Any Other Relief” Is Insufficient to Compel an R.C. 3503.24(B) Hearing or Alternative Remedies

Pleading Matters in Election Mandamus: Generic “Any Other Relief” Is Insufficient to Compel an R.C. 3503.24(B) Hearing or Alternative Remedies

Date: Oct 9, 2025
Pleading Matters in Election Mandamus: Generic “Any Other Relief” Is Insufficient to Compel an R.C. 3503.24(B) Hearing or Alternative Remedies Introduction In State ex rel. Hicks v. Adams County...
No Prohibition for Procedural Missteps Under R.C. 2981.03: Subject-Matter Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction in Post-Sentence Property-Return Orders

No Prohibition for Procedural Missteps Under R.C. 2981.03: Subject-Matter Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction in Post-Sentence Property-Return Orders

Date: Oct 9, 2025
No Prohibition for Procedural Missteps Under R.C. 2981.03: Subject-Matter Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction in Post-Sentence Property-Return Orders Introduction This commentary analyzes the...
Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • Judgment Takedown Policy (India)
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases
  • Acts

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert