Category Archives: What’s On Their Minds?

What’s On Their Minds: Is Questioning in the Front Seat of a Police Cruiser a Custodial Interrogation? City of Cleveland v. Benjamin Oles.

“So, he’s not free to leave. Why is he (Oles) not in custody at that point?”

Justice O’Neill.

On March 1, 2017, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of City of Cleveland v. Benjamin … Continue reading

Posted in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law and Procedure, Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , , |

What’s On Their Minds: Is the Exclusionary Rule a Proper Remedy for the Violation of Ohio’s Knock-and-Announce Rule? State of Ohio v. Sherri Bembry and Harsimran Singh.

“Going forward, how do we ensure that we don’t have a successive violation of the knock and announce rule if in fact we say, well, yeah, there was a violation, but it doesn’t really make any difference. There will never … Continue reading

Posted in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law and Procedure, Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , |

What’s On Their Minds: Constitutionality of Searches by Public School Employees. State of Ohio v. Joshua Polk.

“This was a backpack sitting on an empty school bus.  In this day, that’s concerning. I can’t help but look at this from a very practical perspective, perhaps as a parent, and think, everybody knows a backpack sitting there by itself … Continue reading

Posted in Constitutional Law, Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Schools and Education, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , , |

What’s On Their Minds: Propriety of Sentencing Penalty for Exercising Right to Trial. State of Ohio v. Malik Rahab.

“Counsel, do you think it is ever appropriate to look at and comment on a defendant exercising their constitutional right to have the state of Ohio prove beyond a reasonable doubt their guilt of the crimes as charged as a … Continue reading

Posted in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law and Procedure, Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , , |

What’s On Their Minds: Satisfying the Clarity Element of a Wrongful Termination Claim. McGowan v. Medpace.

“I don’t understand how this is anything other than a termination for supporting public policy in Ohio.”

Justice O’Neill, to counsel for Medpace

On February 8, 2017, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of McGowan … Continue reading

Posted in Labor and Employment Law, Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , |

What’s On Their Minds: Does a Juvenile Need to Show Prejudice When the Court Fails to Appoint a Guardian Ad Litem? State of Ohio v. Raymond Morgan.

“But what I am troubled with is at certain stages of these proceedings, there was a breakdown between the lawyer and the child. And if that’s not a red flag for a judge to look at a GAL, I don’t … Continue reading

Posted in Juvenile Law, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , |

What’s On Their Minds: Arbitrator’s Powers in Police Disciplinary Action. Ohio Patrolmen’s Benevolent Ass’n, et al. v. City of Findlay.

“Isn’t the issue whether the arbitrator was bound by the matrix…?”                                            Justice French

On February 7, 2017, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of Ohio Patrolmen’s Benevolent Ass’n, et al. v. City of Findlay, … Continue reading

Posted in Labor and Employment Law, Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , , |

What’s On Their Minds: What Constitutes Proper Presentment of a Claim Against a Decedent’s Estate? James A. Wilson v. William Lawrence, Executor, et al.

“So our issue really is, is substantial compliance or strict compliance necessary here?” Chief Justice O’Connor

On January 11, 2017, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of James A. Wilson v. William Lawrence, Executor, … Continue reading

Posted in Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Probate, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , |

What’s On Their Minds: Validity of Permanent Surrender Agreement in Adoption Case. In re: (C.C.S.), (C.L.S.) v. Adoption by Gentle Care.

Update: On October 27, 2016, by a vote of 4-3, this case was dismissed as improvidently accepted. Voting to dismiss were Chief justice O’Connor, and Justices O’Donnell, Lanzinger and O’Neill. Justices Pfeifer, Kennedy, and French dissented. 

“I’m just looking … Continue reading

Posted in Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , , |

What’s On Their Minds: Interpreting the Meaning of “Transacts Business” under R.C. 4117.13(D). Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority v. State Employment Relations Board et al.

Update: On November 2, 2016, the Supreme Court of Ohio dismissed the case as improvidently allowed.

“You don’t run busses in Franklin County. You don’t have bus stops, you don’t have parking lots, you don’t have any of the … Continue reading

Posted in Ohio Supreme Court Watch, Student Contributors, What's On Their Minds? | Tagged , , |