Robert E. Holmes

The case arose from a negligence lawsuit in which Peter Fantozzi and his wife sued Sandusky Cement Products Company after a warped metal chute fell and injured him while he was spreading concrete delivered by the company's truck, allegedly due to the company's reckless conduct. The trial court ordered a prerecorded videotape trial over the objections of both parties and submitted to the jury an instruction and special interrogatory on damages for loss of ability to perform usual functions. The Supreme Court of Ohio held that a trial court commits reversible error by ordering a videotape trial without first consulting the parties' attorneys, considering costs, the nature of the action, and the testimony involved, and determining that a compelling reason exists with no prejudice to the parties. The court further held that, when supported by evidence, damages for loss of ability to perform usual functions may be presented to the jury in a separate instruction and finding, as long as the jury is instructed not to award duplicative damages under other categories such as pain and suffering.

proceduretorts & liability

The case concerned a petition by fourteen landowners to annex about 320 acres in Warren County, Ohio, to the Village of South Lebanon, which the Board of County Commissioners approved after a hearing despite opposition from Cincinnati Milacron, Inc., a landowner in the territory. The Supreme Court of Ohio ruled that R.C. 709.07 supplies the exclusive remedy for challenging a board's approval of a landowners' annexation petition and that the statute does not authorize a reviewing court to partially enjoin or sever portions of an approved petition. The court reasoned from the text of the annexation statutes and prior precedent that alternative appeal procedures under R.C. Chapter 2506 are unavailable when a landowners' petition is granted, distinguishing the case from decisions allowing severance in other annexation contexts.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned the distribution of life insurance proceeds where a divorce decree and separation agreement required the policy to provide coverage for the education of the couple's child, Kelly Rae Hussey. On a motion for clarification of its earlier opinion, the Ohio Supreme Court held that the proceeds are subject to a constructive trust for Kelly's education, after which any remaining balance must go to the named beneficiary on the policy, Marcia S. Hussey, the surviving spouse. The court reasoned that the prior opinion's reference to distribution under a trust for another party was erroneous because no such trust existed, and the policy terms control the remainder.

family law

The case involved Jerry R. Lawson, who was convicted of aggravated murder after he shot and killed Timothy Martin, a confidential informant who had helped police investigate Lawson's brother for burglary. Lawson appealed his conviction and death sentence to the Ohio Supreme Court, raising multiple challenges including claims that Ohio's capital punishment statutes were unconstitutional because they failed to narrow the class of death-eligible offenders, permitted arbitrary imposition of the penalty, and lacked sufficient standards for sentencing and review. The court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, rejecting all constitutional and procedural arguments. It held that the statutes complied with constitutional requirements and that prior precedent governed issues such as the order of closing arguments in the penalty phase.

criminal law

The case involved a public school teacher employed by the Stark County Board of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities who sued her employer in state court, alleging that supervisors harassed, discriminated against, and retaliated against her for criticizing board operations, filing discrimination charges with state and federal agencies, and pursuing an assault lawsuit against administrators. These actions, she claimed, violated her rights under the Ohio Constitution, including protections for speech and against discrimination. The trial court granted summary judgment to the board, and the court of appeals affirmed. The Ohio Supreme Court held that public employees lack a private civil cause of action to redress alleged violations of Ohio constitutional policies when reasonably satisfactory remedies already exist through statutory enactments and administrative processes, such as collective bargaining grievance procedures and civil rights commission filings. The decision relied on the principle that courts should not create new judicial remedies in such circumstances.

labor & employmentcivil rightsfree speech

The case involved the City of Willoughby Hills appealing a decision by its own Board of Building and Zoning Appeals that granted a restaurant a variance to expand a nonconforming use by enclosing a patio. The trial court dismissed the appeal for lack of standing, and the court of appeals affirmed, holding that R.C. 2506.01 does not allow a municipality to challenge its own board's decisions. The Ohio Supreme Court reversed, ruling that when a city's charter or ordinances expressly permit it to seek review of board determinations, the municipality has standing under R.C. 2506.01 to appeal in common pleas court, following precedent from State ex rel. Broadway Petroleum Corp. v. Elyria and distinguishing Kasper v. Coury.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory