Podcast - Ohio State Senator Has a Bone to Pick with Court Ruling on Boneless Wings
In a recent opinion, the Supreme Court of Ohio definitively held that a creditor does not have an affirmative duty to disclose facts that materially increase risk to a surety—and nor does a surety have a duty to disclose to...more
In 2024, we alerted you to a decision out of the First Appellate District of Ohio (The Huntington National Bank v. Schneider, C-230072 (December 29, 2023)), where the Court was asked to review a grant of summary judgment in...more
In Ashmus v. Coughlin, 2025-Ohio-2412, the Ohio Supreme Court provided important guidance on the scope of a seller’s disclosure obligations under Ohio Revised Code 5302.30, particularly when it comes to “material defects” in...more
On May 28, 2025, the Supreme Court of Ohio passed on an opportunity to settle a long-standing legal question: Does Ohio law require a trial court to conduct an oral hearing before compelling arbitration under R.C. 2711.03?...more
Marchbanks v. Ice House Ventures, LLC, Slip. Op. No. 2023-Ohio-1866. In this discretionary appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court reversed the appellate court’s ruling, finding that an enforceable settlement agreement existed,...more
The Ohio Supreme Court waited until the last week of the year to issue what may be the most important silent coverage decision of 2022. Direct physical injury is a fundamental requirement of first-party property policies. The...more
In this discretionary appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court outlined when and in what circumstances an equitable lien may arise. The Bullet Point: A lien is “‘a hold or claim which one person has upon the property of another as...more
Ohio- Uniform Trade Secrets Act Sal’s Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. Bers Acquisition Co., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 110685, 2022-Ohio-1756- In this appeal, the Eighth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s decision,...more
Ohio- Statute of Frauds- Kopsky v. MURrubber Technologies, Inc., 9th Dist. Summit Nos. 29867, 29984, 2022-Ohio-511- In this appeal, the Ninth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s decision, agreeing that the...more
Contract Interpretation McCruter v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co., 11th Dist. Lake No. 2019-L-167, 2021-Ohio-472- In this appeal, the Eleventh Appellate District affirmed in part and reversed in part the lower court’s...more
The Appellate Law Practice Group of Roetzel & Andress represented clients in a wide variety of cases in both state and federal courts, appealing adverse trial court rulings and successfully defending lower court victories on...more
The Court’s decision in New Riegel Local School District Board of Education, et al. v. The Buehrer Group Architecture & Engineering, Inc., et al. interprets Ohio’s Statute of Repose, which generally requires certain...more
On July 17, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio announced a major victory for the Ohio construction industry in the ongoing battle over whether Ohio’s construction statute of repose, R.C. 2305.131, bars claims for breach of...more
Welcome to CICR’s annual review of insurance cases. Here, we spotlight five (actually, seven) decisions from the last year that you should know about, and five pending cases—all before state high courts—to keep an eye on. The...more
Boone Coleman Constr., Inc. v. Vill. of Piketon, 2016-Ohio-628, 2016 Ohio LEXIS 441 (Ohio Feb. 24, 2016) - A general contractor entered into a construction contract with a public agency for a road construction project...more