04/07/2005 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

CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

April 7, 2005

[Cite as 04/07/2005 Case Announcements, 2005-Ohio-1639.]

MOTIONS AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2003-1572. State ex rel. Howard v. Seaway Food Town, Inc.
Franklin App. No. 97AP-860. On September 24, 2004, this court found appellant
Gregory T. Howard to be a vexatious litigator under S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(5)(B). This
court further ordered that appellant was prohibited from continuing or instituting
legal proceedings in this court without first obtaining leave. On March 29, 2005,
appellant submitted a motion for leave to file a motion for nunc pro tunc correction
of this court's March 28, 2005, order regarding attorney fees. Upon consideration
thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for leave be, and hereby is,
granted and that appellant shall file the motion for correction within ten days of the
date of this entry.

2005-0192. State v. Mundt.
Noble C.P. 2042002. This cause is pending before the court as a death penalty
appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Noble County. Upon consideration of
the parties' responses to this court's March 4, 2005 show cause order,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the Clerk of the Noble County Court of
Common Pleas shall not be required to transport the physical trial exhibits to the
Clerk of this court. Photographs of the physical exhibits shall be included with the
remainder of the record that is transported.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this order is subject to further
consideration by this court if a physical exhibit is necessary for the review and
determination of this cause on appeal.

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2004-1112. UCAR Carbon Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2003-R-261. This cause is pending before the court as
an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. 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.

2004-1113. UCAR Carbon Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2003-R-262. This cause is pending before the court as
an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. 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.

2004-1114. UCAR Carbon Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2003-R-263. This cause is pending before the court as
an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. 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.

2004-1115. UCAR Carbon Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2003-R-264. This cause is pending before the court as
an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. 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.

2004-1116. UCAR Carbon Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2003-R-265. This cause is pending before the court as
an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. Upon consideration of appellant's
application for dismissal,
2
04-07-05

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.

2004-1916. State ex rel. Kynard v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 03AP-1071, 2004-Ohio-5153. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin 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.

2005-0056. State ex rel. McBride v. United Home Care.
Franklin App. No. 04AP-114, 2004-Ohio-6614. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin 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.

2005-0393. Cashin v. Cobett.
Cuyahoga App. No. 84475, 2005-Ohio-102. This cause is pending before the court
as a discretionary appeal. 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.

MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

In re Report of the Commission

On Continuing Legal Education.

E N T R Y
Jeffrey A. Miller

(#0068815),

3
04-07-05

Respondent.

This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education ("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, including the above-named respondent, for
failure to comply with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. X, Attorney Continuing Legal
Education, for the 2001-2002 reporting period.

On December 5, 2003, this court adopted the recommendation of the
commission, imposed a sanction fee upon the respondent, and suspended the
respondent from the practice of law pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(3) and
(5)(A)(4). The court further ordered that respondent shall not be reinstated to the
practice of law in Ohio until respondent complies with the requirements for
reinstatement set forth in Gov.Bar R. X(7); respondent complies with the Supreme
Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio; respondent complies with this
and all other orders of the court; and this court orders respondent reinstated.

On February 24, 2005, the commission filed a recommendation pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. X(7)(B)(2), finding that the respondent has paid all fees assessed for
noncompliance, has made up all deficiencies, and is now in full compliance with
all requirements of Gov.Bar R. X, and recommending that the respondent be
reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio. On February 24, 2005, the commission
certified that respondent had completed the credit hours of continuing legal
education required during his suspension by this court's order of suspension. Upon
consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the recommendation of the commission is
adopted and respondent, Jeffrey A. Miller, is hereby reinstated to the practice of
law.

MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following cases have been referred to mediation pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6):

2005-0513. State ex rel. McKenney v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 03AP-1196, 2005-Ohio-981.

2005-0557. Strongsville Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.
Board of Tax Appeals No. 2003-G-663.

4
04-07-05