News & Analysis as of

OH Supreme Court

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Energy Law: Month in Review - April 2026

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Welcome to Dorsey’s Energy Law: Month in Review. We provide this update to our clients to identify significant developments in the previous month. ...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Ohio Supreme Court Tries to Sort Out Sources of Its Privilege Law

McGuireWoods LLP on

Depending on the state, the critical attorney-client privilege protection might be articulated in one or more of several sources, including laws, court rules and common law. In Eddy v. Farmers Property Casualty Insurance Co.,...more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies Adverse Possession Element “Open and Notorious”

The Supreme Court of Ohio recently ruled in NC Ents., L.L.C. v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., Slip Opinion No. 2026-Ohio-1429 (the “NC-Norfolk Case”) that Appellee’s lawn maintenance on Appellant’s parcels was not sufficiently open...more

Benesch

The Headline Problem In Defamation Law: A Proposal For Fixing Illinois’ And Ohio’s Outdated Innocent Construction Rule

Benesch on

Defamation lawsuits are on the rise in the United States, and have been for several years. Because defamation litigation is so increasingly relied upon as a means to address reputational injury, it is appropriate to examine...more

Freeman Mathis & Gary

Broad means broad: Ohio Supreme Court compels arbitration of bad-faith claim

Freeman Mathis & Gary on

If Ohio classifies a bad-faith claim-handling claim as a tort arising by operation of law, is that claim arbitrable? As of November 2025, the Supreme Court of Ohio says yes, it is—at least so long as the controlling...more

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP

The 21-Year Clock: Adverse Possession Time is Ticking

Can the Timeframe to Establish Adverse Possession Begin by Mowing Your Neighbor’s Lawn? That is the question that was presented to the Supreme Court of Ohio in NC Enterprises, LLC, v Norfolk and Western Railway Company,...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

The Supreme Court of Ohio Clarifies Statutory Standing and Retroactive Remedies

Recently, the Supreme Court of Ohio decided a case addressing two issues that have important implications for litigants. The first issue involves statutory standing under Ohio law....more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Ohio Supreme Court decertifies class based on statutory bar of class action damages for 2020 mortgage release delays

On February 19, the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part a lower court ruling in a dispute brought under Ohio’s mortgage-release statute (R.C. 5301.36), holding that the trial court erred in certifying the...more

Pillsbury - SeeSalt Blog

Not the CAT’s Meow: Ohio Supreme Court Reins in the Continuous Delivery Theory for Situsing Receipts

Recent Ohio Supreme Court decisions addressing the situsing of receipts under the Commercial Activity Tax (CAT) underscore both the limits of the “continuous delivery theory” and the evidentiary hurdles taxpayers face when...more

Blank Rome LLP

Prove It: Evidentiary Standard for Sales Situsing

Blank Rome LLP on

While sourcing sales of tangible personal property is seemingly easier than sourcing sales of services, it is not without its difficulties. One of those issues is establishing where the product was ultimately delivered....more

Freeman Mathis & Gary

Capping catastrophe: Is Ohio’s catastrophic-injury limit constitutional?

Freeman Mathis & Gary on

Last week, the Supreme Court of Ohio was asked if Ohio’s cap on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions was constitutional. On one side, John Paganini argued it was not as applied to him and asked the Court to...more

Marshall Dennehey

Ohio Supreme Court Enforces Broad Arbitration Clause in Insurance Policy, Extending to Bad Faith Claims

Marshall Dennehey on

U.S. Acute Care Solutions, L.L.C. v. Doctors Company Risk Retention Group Insurance Company, --- N.E.3d ---, 2025-Ohio-5010 (Ohio 2025) - In this medical malpractice lawsuit filed against an emergency services provider, the...more

Roetzel & Andress

Ohio Supreme Court Ruling on Commercial Activity Taxes for Goods Shipped to Ohio – What You Need to Know for Your Business

Roetzel & Andress on

On January 14, 2026, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld the Board of Tax Appeals’ (BTA) denial of a Jones Apparel Group/Nine West Holdings refund claim for Commercial Activity Taxes (CAT) paid on goods that were sold to a customer...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

Supreme Court of Ohio Holds PUCO has Exclusive Jurisdiction Over Claims Asserted Against Public Utility

Earlier this month, a unanimous Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Ninth District Court of Appeals holding that the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) has exclusive jurisdiction over certain claims...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of Ultimate Destination for CAT

Husch Blackwell LLP on

Over the course of a few weeks, the Ohio Supreme Court has released a pair of decisions that offer guidance on how to determine the situs of gross receipts for purposes of calculating the Commercial Activity Tax (CAT) as well...more

Alston & Bird

Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies CAT for Sourcing Sales to Distribution Centers

Alston & Bird on

In a January 14, 2026 opinion, the Ohio Supreme Court denied an apparel company’s $855,000 refund claim for Ohio’s commercial activity tax (CAT) for tax years 2010 through 2016. ...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

Who Frames the Case? Adhering to the Party Presentation Principle

Few principles more clearly define who controls a lawsuit than the party presentation principle: courts decide cases on arguments presented by the parties, not arguments the court wishes the parties would have brought....more

Marshall Dennehey

Legal Updates for Real Estate E&O – Case Law Update - November 2025

Marshall Dennehey on

Ohio Supreme Court Clarifies Sellers’ Disclosure Obligations: No Duty to Disclose Publicly Recorded Easements - Ashmus v. Coughlin, 2025-Ohio-2412 - The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that sellers are not required to disclose...more

Benesch

Workers' Comp Ruling May Expand Ohio Employer Liability

Benesch on

In State ex rel. Berry v. Industrial Commission, the Ohio Supreme Court recently ruled that courts are not required to defer to the Ohio Industrial Commission's interpretations of the state's specific safety requirements....more

Carlton Fields

Ohio Supreme Court Holds Arbitration Clause in Medical Malpractice Policy Applies to Bad Faith Claims

Carlton Fields on

In U.S. Acute Care Solutions LLC v. Doctors Company Risk Retention Group Insurance Co., the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled that an emergency care service provider must arbitrate its claim for bad faith against its insurer,...more

King & Spalding

Ohio Supreme Court Says Creditors Do Not Have an Affirmative Duty to Disclose Facts That Materially Increase Risk to a Surety

King & Spalding on

On August 20, 2025, the Ohio Supreme Court clarified the obligations of lenders and guarantors in arm’s-length financial transactions and declined to adopt the obligations set out by Section 124(1) of the Restatement (First)...more

Benesch

Ohio Supreme Court Rejects Deference to Industrial Commission in VSSR Proceedings

Benesch on

In State ex rel. Berry v. Industrial Commission, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that courts are not required to defer to the Industrial Commission’s interpretations of Ohio’s specific safety requirements. Courts must instead...more

Marshall Dennehey

Ohio Appeals Court Affirms Class Certification in Auto Insurance Total Loss Valuation Dispute; Ohio Supreme Court Review Pending

Marshall Dennehey on

Mon Cheri Davenport v. Progressive Direct Ins., 2025-Ohio-2449 (8th Dist.) - The plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit in the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, alleging that an insurer’s use of projected sold adjustments...more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Service to Former Address Not Enough, Ohio Supreme Court Rules

In Hunt v. Alderman, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that service of a complaint by certified mail to a defendant’s former address fails both the requirements of Ohio Civil Rule 4.1(A)(1)(a) and the due process requirement...more

Bricker Graydon Wyatt LLP

Ohio Supreme Court Win for Nursing Homes and Quality Incentive Payments

In a unanimous decision on September 2, 2025, the Ohio Supreme Court delivered a major win to nursing home operators by ordering the Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) to recalculate the quality incentive payments for nursing...more

211 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 9

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide