Supreme Court case announcements, 3/15/17

The Court has accepted six new cases for review.

Poor Thomas Warren

At first glance Tom Warren might not be an obvious candidate for your sympathy. He's a partner at Baker Hostetler, where he's the leader of its appellate defense group. Graduate of Harvard College and Stanford Law, former federal prosecutor, adjunct professor at three law schools...

Supreme Court case announcements, 2/22/17

The Supreme Court has announced the acceptance of five new cases (though only three were placed on the active docket). All five cases involve review of decisions from the Eighth District.

What authority does the Clerk of Courts have to reject a filing?

Not as much as some clerks seem to think, says the Fifth District in State ex rel. Kess v. Antonoplos.

Brief filed: Stewart v. Vivian

Today we filed our reply brief in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the appellant in Stewart v. Vivian. You can read the brief here.

Stewart relates to the proper interpretation of section 2317.43 of the Revised Code. The docket is here. Our merits brief was filed in November, and the appellee's brief was filed last month.

The case is scheduled for argument on Thursday, April 6.

Oral argument scheduled in Stewart v. Vivian

The Court has scheduled argument in our case Stewart v. Vivian for Thursday, April 6. I'm pleased to note that the argument will be conducted in Morgan County, Ohio, as part of the Court's off-site program, which has as a goal the education of high school students about the Court and legal system. While I'm disappointed we won't be going to the Court's home in Columbus, the off-site program gives students a chance to interact with the Justices and lawyers, which is great. I participated in a similar program in December, albeit with the Chamber of Commerce, rather than students.

Some prior discussion of the Stewart case can be found here. We will file, and I will share, our reply brief on Monday.

Brief filed: R&R Family Investments v. The Plastic Moldings Corp.

Today we filed a notice of appeal and a jurisdictional brief in the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of the appellant in R&R Family Investments v. The Plastic Moldings Corp., et al. You can read the brief here.

At issue in the case is whether a property owner owes a duty to people outside the land with regard to naturally occurring conditions of which the owner has actual knowledge. More particularly, our brief asks the Court to accept the appeal in order to adopt Section 54 of the Restatement Third of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm.