The court instructed the jury on the applicable law in defendant's murder trial.

The court reversed the decision holding that the paragraphs five and eight of the settlement agreement between petitioner husband and respondent wife were ambiguous as to whether respondent was entitled to commission payment made to petitioner, which ceased to be made, required petitioner to pay the difference up to $ 25,000.

The judgment in favor of respondent patient and against appellant doctor was reversed because it was impossible to determine the basis for the jury's verdict under the theory that appellant was negligent during the operation. The case was remanded for a new trial to determine whether appellant adequately informed respondent of the risks involved and whether the injury was causally related to any failure to warn.

The court answered the certified question, whether the appellate court's order was properly made, in the affirmative. It affirmed the appellate court's order.

The order of summary judgment was affirmed.

The court affirmed the judgment for defendant in plaintiff administratrix's action to recover a bank deposit, because the plea of res judicata was available against plaintiff as a party to the former proceeding despite plaintiff's formal change of capacity.

That portion of the circuit court's judgment which denied the policyholders' request for equitable relief was affirmed. All other portions of the circuit court's judgment were reversed. Those portions of the appellate court judgment which affirmed the denial of equitable relief and which reversed the circuit court's award of disgorgement damages were affirmed. All other portions of the appellate court's...

The judgment order dismissing the claim was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.

The employee's motions for adverse inference instruction and for reconsideration of the order denying the costs for restoration of the backup tapes. The employee's motion for costs for the additional depositions was granted.

The employer was ordered to produce all responsive e-mails that existed on its optical disks or on its active servers at its own expense. The employer was also ordered to produce, at its expense, responsive e-mails from any five backups tapes selected by the employee.

The court affirmed the district court's decision.

The court reversed the judgment and vacated the preliminary injunction vacated.

The appellate court affirmed the judgments of the district court except to the extent that one defendant's restitution requirements were modified to align with his indigent status, so that certain portions of the restitution order would become active only upon a change of financial circumstances.

The judgment and accompanying sentence of the district court were affirmed.

The judgment of sentence was affirmed.

The court reversed the district court's decision and remanded the case for resentencing.

The court withdrew its earlier opinion on petitioner workers' compensation carrier's motion for rehearing. The court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals, which had affirmed the jury's award of actual, mental anguish, and punitive damages to respondent injured employee. Respondent did not present legally sufficient evidence of gross negligence and was not entitled to punitive damages.

The highest court (1) redefined a test to determine if the shareholders' claim was a direct or a derivative claim, (2) found they did not state a derivative claim, (3) found they did not state a ripe direct claim upon which relief could be granted, but that that issue was not argued, and (4) affirmed the dismissal, but reversed the judgment and remanded for the trial court to dismiss the case without prejudice--with...

The court dismissed plaintiffs' claims against defendant police, and against defendant therapist for failure to confine, but reversed against defendant therapists for failure to warn, holding the special relationship to patient was extended to victim, and they had a duty to use reasonable care in warning victim of the danger.

The court reversed the trial court's judgment against the employee and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

The court affirmed the decision to withhold treatment from respondent.

The court affirmed the judgment.

The court severed a variety of statutory sections in the Ohio sentencing scheme which were held unconstitutional, and directed that the holding was to be applied to all cases herein as well as those pending on direct review, such that remand to trial courts for new sentencing hearings was required. The court affirmed the judgments in two matters herein and reversed and remanded for resentencing as to two others.

The court answered the certified questions in the negative, determining that the capital punishment statute was constitutional. The court reversed the lower court decision which had found the statute to be unconstitutional.

The court reversed the judgment of the superior court that was against appellant insurance company.