Update: On July 17, 2013 the Supreme Court handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

On February 26, 2013, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Vacha v. North Ridgeville, 2011-1050 and 2011-1327. The case was accepted as a discretionary appeal and on conflict certification,

Update: On July 17, 2013 the Supreme Court handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

Read the analysis of the oral argument here.

On February 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in the case of Vacha v. North Ridgeville, 2011-1050. The issue in this

Update: Read what happened on remand in this case here and here.

On November 20, 2012 the Court handed down a merit decision in M.H. v. Cuyahoga Falls, 2012-Ohio-5336. (when the case was originally argued, the minor’s name was in the caption, but due to a rule change, initials have been substituted.) The case

Update: On November 20, 2012, the Court handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

On June 19, 2012, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of Michael L. Hawsman v. City of Cuyahoga Falls, 2011-1588.  Hawsman, a minor, injured his knee while using the diving

Update: On November 20, 2012, the Court handed down a merit decision in this case.  Read the analysis here.

Read the analysis of the oral argument here.

On June 19, 2012, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in the case of Michael L. Hawsman v. City of Cuyahoga Falls, 2011-1588.  At issue

 On February 16 2012, the Supreme Court of Ohio decided the case of Sampson v. Cuyahoga Metr. Hous. Auth., 2012-Ohio-570. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Cupp, the Court held that the employee of a political subdivision could sue his employer for an intentional tort that arose out of the employment relationship. 

Darrell Sampson

Update: On December 6, 2012, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals decision on the authority of  of Anderson v. Massillon. Read the anlysis here.

On February 7, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in the case of Burlingame v. Estate of Burlingame. The Court has accepted the following propositions