3/11/2003 Case Announcements - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

[Cite as 3/11/2003 Case Announcements, 2003-Ohio-1076.]
The Supreme Court of Ohio

CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

March 11, 2003

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2002-0252. Robinson v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.
Lake App. No. 2001-L-119, 2001-Ohio-8793. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Lake County. Upon consideration
of joint application for dismissal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and
hereby is, granted.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause
be, and hereby is, dismissed.

2002-1984. In re Buechter.
Miami App. No. 2002CA22, 2002-Ohio-5598. This cause is pending before the
court on the certification of a conflict by the Court of Appeals for Miami County.
Upon consideration of appellant's application for dismissal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and
hereby is, granted.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause
be, and hereby is, dismissed.

2003-0100. Cincinnati School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of
Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2002-A-1142. This cause is pending before the court as
an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. It appears from the records of this court
that appellant has not filed a merit brief, due March 3, 2003, in compliance with

the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to prosecute
this case with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed,
sua sponte.

2003-0131. Crise v. Cleveland.
Cuyahoga App. No. 80984, 2002-Ohio-6229. This cause is pending before the
court as a discretionary appeal. Upon consideration of appellee's motion to dismiss
the notice of appeal and memorandum in support of jurisdiction as untimely, and it
appearing to the court that appellant's notice of appeal and memorandum in support
of jurisdiction were not filed within 45 days of the court of appeals' judgment, as
required by S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(1),

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that appellant's notice of appeal
and memorandum be, and hereby are, stricken.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is,
dismissed.

MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

In re Report of the Commission
:
on Continuing Legal Education.
:

:

O R D E R
Laura Marie Franze
:
(#0026632), :
Respondent. :

This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education (the "commission") pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d). The commission recommended the
imposition of sanctions against certain attorneys and judges, including the above-
named respondent, for failure to comply with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. X and
Gov.Jud.R. IV, for the 2000-2001 reporting period.

On November 6, 2002, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(1), this court issued
to the respondent an order to show cause why the commission's recommendation
should not be adopted and an order so entered against the respondent. Respondent
filed objections to the commission's recommendation and this cause was
considered by the court. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that respondent shall pay to the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education, within 30 days of the date of this
2

order, by certified check, bank check, or money order, a sanction fee which is
hereby imposed in the total amount of $430.00.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the court shall record the
respondent's status on the roll of attorneys as "NOT IN GOOD STANDING" until
such time as the respondent has complied with this order but that this order shall
not be considered a disciplinary order pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V or Gov.Bar R.
X(6)(H).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the commission shall notify the Clerk of
the court when payment of the imposed sanction has been made by respondent.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, payment of the sanction notwithstanding,
respondent shall comply with the requirements imposed by Gov.Bar R. X for the
2000-2001 reporting period. See CLE Reg. 503.04.

3