164 N.E.3d
Volume 164 — North Eastern Reporter, Third Series
9 opinions
- 164 N.E.3d 532Papa's Homes, L.L.C. v. Maple Park Terrace Condominium Assn., Inc. (2020)
R.C. Chapter 5311 condominium association Civ.R. 56 summary judgment. The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the condominium association and against the unit owner for damage caused to the interior ceiling and flooring of the unit because under the unambiguous terms of the applicable contract, the unit owner is responsible for all costs to repair internal installations, fixtures, windows, and doors, along with all associated structures, and is also responsible for the cost to repair all portions of the unit, which expressly includes the floors and ceiling of the unit.
- 164 N.E.3d 556Fayette Drywall, Inc. v. Oettinger (2020)
The trial court did not err by granting appellee's motion to waive arbitration and to vacate a stay instead of staying the matter until completion of arbitration in accordance with this court's prior remand order. The trial court's decisions were reasonable in light of the circumstances that existed after the remand order was issued, and the trial court acted within its discretion in determining that appellants who opposed the lifting of the stay had waived the right to arbitration. Order affirmed.
- 164 N.E.3d 569Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO, Local 697 v. Toledo Area Regional Transit Auth. (2020)
Trial court erred granting petition to compel arbitration. Judgment reversed. Statutory interpretation, arbitrability, de novo review, findings of fact, abuse of discretion
- 164 N.E.3d 595State v. Brooks (2020)
Appellant's conviction for having weapon under disability is supported by sufficient evidence where appellant has a disability, and constructively possesses the weapon while he is in jail by directing his girlfriend to take his gun, use it for her protection, and put it into his safe.
- 164 N.E.3d 1096U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. George (2020)
The trial court did not err in entering a foreclosure judgment in favor of appellee. Appellee proved its entitlement to enforce the note and mortgage. Judgment affirmed.
- 164 N.E.3d 1130State v. Lawson (2020)
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motions for a continuance and for new counsel, both made on the morning of trial. Appellant told the court on the morning of trial that he was ready to proceed with trial the trial court reasonably denied his subsequent request for a continuance, made after almost two hours of voir dire. Although appellant expressed dissatisfaction with his attorney, the trial court could have reasonably concluded that the issues were not so great that it would prevent an effective defense. The circumstances in this case did not rise to the magnitude that it was unlikely that appellant could have received the effective assistance of counsel therefore, prejudice was not presumed. No ineffective assistance of counsel was demonstrated based on defense counsel's specific conduct. The State presented sufficient evidence to support the jury's guilty verdicts for possession of drugs and trafficking in drugs. The State's evidence supported a reasonable conclusion that appellant knowingly possessed the drugs located in a search of the vehicle he was driving, even though the vehicle was left unattended on the street for a limited period of time. In addition, the State's evidence established that appellant knew the drugs were in the car and that he drove the car with the intention of selling those drugs. Judgment affirmed.
- 164 N.E.3d 1159Setters v. Durrani (2020)
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – EVIDENCE – EVID.R. 403 – DAMAGES – CIV.R. 17 – REAL PARTY IN INTEREST – JOINDER – CUMULATIVE ERROR – R.C. 2307.28 – R.C. 2323.43: In a medical-malpractice trial, the trial court violated Evid.R. 403 by admitting evidence that the defendant-doctor's medical licenses had been revoked however, the error was harmless because substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict and defendant-doctor's credibility was otherwise impeached. The trial court did not err in denying the motion for a directed verdict, the JNOV motion, and the motion for a new trial on the award of noneconomic damages where there was sufficient evidence to submit the issue of "permanent and substantial physical deformity" to the jury: as a result of the surgeries, plaintiff sustained a "misshapen" neck and suffered a restricted range of motion in her cervical spine. The trial court did not err in denying the motion for a directed verdict, the JNOV motion, and the motion for a new trial on the award of future economic damages where there was sufficient evidence to support an award for future nonsurgical medical expenses: plaintiff presented evidence of how long she would require pain-management treatment, how often she would require treatment, and the costs associated with treatment. The trial court did not err in denying the motion for a directed verdict, the JNOV motion, and the motion for a new trial on the issue of conservative care where there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that defendant-doctor negligently failed to use conservative treatment before pursuing lumbar surgery: plaintiff presented evidence that the standard of care required continued conservative treatment in the form of medication, physical therapy, and multiple epidural injections. The trial court did not err in denying the JNOV motion under Civ.R. 17 where plaintiff was a real party in interest and defendants waived the defense of failure to join a necessary party: there was no evidence in the record that plaintiff's insurance company paid all of plaintiff's medical bills and defendants took no action to prosecute the failure to join plaintiff's insurance company beyond asserting a mere conclusory statement in their answer. A party waives the right to claim a necessary party was not joined when it does not take affirmative action to pursue that defense. The doctrine of cumulative error is inapplicable where there are not multiple instances of harmless error. The trial court erred in denying defendants' application for a setoff under R.C. 2307.28: defendants were entitled to a setoff of the settlement proceeds against the jury verdict. Defendants were not entitled to a remittitur because insurance company's payment of plaintiff's medical expenses constituted "economic loss" under R.C. 2323.43: any payment of medical bills constitutes "expenditures for medical care or treatment," and thus, "economic loss" under R.C. 2323.43(H)(1)(b).
- 164 N.E.3d 1205Crim v. Dietrich (2020)
- 164 N.E.3d 1238Restore Construction Company, Inc. v. Board of Education of Proviso Township High Schools District 209 (2020)