Update: This case was settled and a judgment entry of dismissal with prejudice entered September 10, 2020

“R.C. 2744.02(B)(1)(a) makes plain that it is the driver’s conduct and culpability in operating a vehicle—not the political subdivision’s—that determines whether the political subdivision may be held liable under the statute.”

Justice Kennedy, majority opinion

On November 20

“Because Soto entered his guilty plea prior to the empaneling of a jury or the taking of evidence, jeopardy attached—but only as to the child-endangering charge to which he pleaded guilty and not as to the dismissed involuntary-manslaughter charge.”

Justice DeWine, Majority opinion

“Under the majority’s conclusion, no plea bargain is necessarily conclusive and any

Update: On February 19, 2020, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

“Has the U.S. Supreme Court ever recognized that the right to raise one’s children includes the right to inflict corporal punishment?”

Justice DeWine, to counsel for Faggs

“Why is it unreasonable to put

Commentary: Dueling Visions of Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor and Justice Sharon Kennedy

By Professor Emerita Marianna Bettman

Be forewarned. This is a wonky post. Well, I am a retired law professor.

Chief Justice O’Connor and Justice Kennedy don’t see eye to eye very much, especially in matters regarding juveniles.  One very clear example of this

Update: On February 19, 2020, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

Read an analysis of the oral argument here.

On October 23, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in State of Ohio v. Clinton D. Faggs, III, 2018-1592. At

Update: On May 6, 2020, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

On September 11, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. Pusser et al., 2018-1137. At issue in this case is whether the words “may”

“We reject the contention that authority to provide for the comfort and general welfare of employees is limited to regulating the workplace environment or workplace conditions and hazards.”

Justice Kennedy, lead opinion

“In continuing to expand the scope of Section 34 in ways never countenanced by the people of 1912, this court is well on

“We reject the contention that authority to provide for the comfort and general welfare of employees is limited to regulating the workplace environment or workplace conditions and hazards.”

Justice Kennedy, lead opinion

“In continuing to expand the scope of Section 34 in ways never countenanced by the people of 1912, this court is well on

“Upon review, we hold that there is insufficient evidence of causation as a matter of law to support the claims of negligence and negligent entrustment against Giant Eagle.”

Justice Stewart, opinion of the court

On September 19, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in   Rieger v. Giant Eagle, Inc., 2019-Ohio-3745.

On March 25, 2020 the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

“So, what would be the basis for a multiplier of the lodestar? What would be an example?”

Justice Stewart, to counsel for DCO

“Why is the fee award in this case not arbitrary as