Volume 239 — North Eastern Reporter, Third Series

PROBATE – overruling objections adopting a magistrate's decision guardianship incompetent removal of Appellant as the Ward's representative payee Social Security benefits abuse of discretion standard R.C. 2111.13(A)(1)-(2) and (4) the court addressed misappropriation and determined that Appellant mismanaged the Ward's funds by not timely paying the Ward's rent nor providing him with money to purchase personal items the record supports the court's finding the court did not err in ordering that Help Network apply to become the Ward's representative payee for his Social Security benefits as federal law does not preempt state law in this instance judgment affirmed.

Motion for summary judgment R.C. 2744.02 R.C. 2744.03 political subdivision tort liability three-tier analysis immunity emergency call. The trial court did not err when it denied a political subdivision's motion for summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether the employee-police officer was on an "emergency call" at the time of the subject automobile accident. The trial court did not err when it denied the police officer's motion for summary judgment where there remained questions of fact whether the officer was responding to an "emergency call" and whether his acts amounted to wanton or reckless behavior.

Improper jury instruction did not constitute plain error convictions for OVI, failure to comply, fictitious plates, and driving with no operator's license supported by sufficient evidence.

The magistrate did not err in concluding R.C. 4123.58(G) is not unconstitutionally retroactive, and the commission did not abuse its discretion in determining relator failed to present evidence of new and changed circumstances to permit the commission to hear the merits of relator's third application for permanent total disability compensation. Writ of mandamus denied.

EVIDENCE – MATERIAL – CHILD AGENCY RECORDS – RAPE – SUFFICIENCY: The trial court erred when it found that the codefendants in a child-rape case were not entitled to the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services' records where the records contain prior inconsistent statements and false accusations of abuse made by multiple state witnesses and child victims. The state presented sufficient evidence in support of defendant's convictions for rape where victim statements in medical records and forensic interviews described defendant's penetrative acts with victims under the age of 13.

Traffic stop obstructing official business overt act insufficient evidence. Appellant was convicted of obstructing official business based on the officer's testimony that he refused to identify himself or provide his driver's license during a traffic stop. However, one cannot be guilty of obstructing official business by doing nothing because the text of R.C. 2921.31, which defines the offense of obstructing official business, specifically requires an offender to act. The mere refusal to answer a police officer's questions regarding one's identity cannot support a conviction for obstructing official business. Because the limited testimony elicited from the officer by the prosecutor did not reflect that appellant engaged in an overt act, appellant's conviction of obstructing official business is vacated for insufficient evidence.

sufficiency, R.C. 2917.21, telecommunications harassment, purpose, intent, R.C. 2901.22