Volume 250 — North Eastern Reporter, Third Series

EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE – CONTRACTS – ARBITRATION: The trial court erred by dismissing plaintiff's claim for unpaid compensation under Illinois law where, under Ohio's conflict of laws rules, application of Ohio law based on the parties' contractual choice of Ohio law would be contrary to a fundamental policy of Illinois and where Illinois has a materially greater interest than Ohio in the application of wage law for plaintiff's work performed in Illinois. The trial court did not err by taxing trial court costs 50 percent to plaintiff and 50 percent to defendants where both plaintiff and defendants prevailed on some, but not all claims and thus where both parties qualified as "prevailing parties" under Civ.R. 54(D). The trial court did not err by not awarding plaintiff prejudgment interest under R.C. 1343.03(A) on plaintiff's award of arbitration costs where plaintiff failed to request it in the trial court. The trial court did not err by denying defendants' motion to modify the arbitration panel's award of 100 percent of arbitration costs to plaintiff against defendants where defendants' argument related to the legal validity of the arbitration costs award but where defendants failed to move to vacate the award rather than moving to modify the award.

FORECLOSURE – SUMMARY JUDGMENT – FINAL ORDER – STANDING – NOTICE OF DEFAULT: Because the trial court had already entered a judgment that plaintiff foreclosing bank's predecessor in interest no longer had any interest in the subject property, the court did not err by omitting the predecessor from the decree in foreclosure, resulting in a final, appealable order. The plaintiff bank had standing to seek foreclosure because, as a matter of law, it received an equitable assignment of the mortgage when it received the note indorsed in blank. The trial court erred in granting summary judgment to plaintiff where the plaintiff had not satisfied all conditions precedent because it did not send its own notice of default, and the predecessor in interest who had sent a notice of default filed and subsequently dismissed its own foreclosure action.

CRIMINAL - Sufficiency of the evidence Aggravated Robbery R.C. 2911.01(A)(1) 2911.01(A)(3) manifest weight of the evidence involuntary acts voluntary intoxication R.C. 2901.21(D)(2) R.C. 2953.08 mandatory prison term R.C. 2929.13(F)(4) R.C. 2929.13(F)(6) plain error ineffective assistance of counsel the court's power to call a witness pursuant to Evid.R. 614(A) is inherent a mistrial should be declared only when the ends of justice so require and a fair trial is no longer possible Evid.R. 404(B) prior bad acts jury instructions blackout defense R.C. 2901.21(E).

Engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity grand theft conspiracy liquor corporation status indictment venue allied offenses. Appellant's convictions for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, conspiracy, grand theft and theft upheld where the evidence unequivocally demonstrated that appellant actively participated in large-scale liquor thefts from Giant Eagle stores. The failure to include corporation status in an indictment did not render it defective. Venue proper in Cuyahoga County because appellant's conduct either occurred in or constituted a significant nexus to Cuyahoga County. Appellant's conviction for grand theft was an aggregate of all individual theft offenses, thus were allied and should have merged at sentencing.

The trial court did not err in overruling appellant's Crim.R. 29 motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the State's case-in-chief. The State presented legally sufficient evidence to support appellant's conviction on a misdemeanor charge of voyeurism. Judgment affirmed.

Retaliation - Menacing by Stalking - Maximum and Consecutive Sentences

Confrontation Clause Sixth Amendment defendant's right to be present plea agreement Crim.R. 11 joint sentencing recommendation court discretion court not obligated to follow sentencing recommendation defendant on notice due process knowing, voluntary, and intelligent plea consecutive sentences findings R.C. 2953.08 clearly and convincingly record supports consecutive sentences R.C. 2929.14(C) statements during hearing viewed in their entirety findings can be found in record. Appellant's Sixth Amendment rights were not violated by his absence at his codefendant's sentencing. In addition, the trial court did not err in imposing a sentence greater than the jointly recommended sentence. Further, the trial court made the requisite findings during the sentencing hearing under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4), and the findings are clearly and convincingly supported by the record. The imposition of consecutive sentences was not contrary to law.

The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment where the employer took no affirmative steps creating a duty to protect third parties from an intoxicated employee.

Weight of the evidence, rape, gross sexual imposition. Reversed and remanded. The defendant's convictions for rape and gross sexual imposition are against the weight of the evidence, and in this exceptional case, the convictions are reversed and remanded for a new trial.

The trial court did not err in granting judgment on the pleadings on appellants' medical negligence claims. Appellants' claims were barred by the statute of repose as extended by the foreign object exception set forth in R.C. 2305.113(D)(2). The statute of repose does not violate the right to remedy provision in the Ohio Constitution. Judgment affirmed.

The trial court did not err in granting appellees' motion for summary judgment. In its claim for tortious interference with business relationships, appellant did not create a genuine issue of material fact that there had been a breach or termination of a contractual relationship. Judgment affirmed.