Court Rulings

Modification of child support obligation abuse of discretion gross income overtime earnings social security wages plain error downward deviation. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in including all of father's overtime earnings in gross income when calculating parents' child support obligations where father offered no testimony or other evidence explaining what portion of his earnings constituted overtime. Trial court did not commit plain error in using the amounts listed as social security wages on the parties' W-2 forms in calculating the parties' child support obligations. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding mother a downward deviation for transportation costs associated with her exercise of her parenting time. Trial court did not place an unequal value on mother's volunteer services and did not abuse its discretion in failing to order mother to pay additional child support based on father's contributions toward the children's school fees and expenses.

Wife died in an automobile collision with Hierro, an employee of Barron's Oilfield Services, Inc. (Barron's). At the time of her death, Wife was married to Husband and had no children. A law firm filed a wrongful death action on Husband's behalf, naming Barron's and Hierro as defendants. However, apparently unbeknownst to the attorneys, Husband had died of natural causes before the complaint was filed. Upon learning of Husband's death, the law firm filed an amended complaint substituting Hansen, Wife's father (Parent), as the plaintiff. Barron's moved to dismiss under CRCP 12(b)(5) arguing that Parent lacked standing under the Colorado Wrongful Death Act (WDA). The trial court granted the motion. On appeal, Parent argued that the district court erred in dismissing his wrongful death action because it interpreted the WDA too strictly. He further argued that fairness and public policy dictate that he should be allowed to file a wrongful death action for the death of Wife under the circumstances here. Parents of an adult deceased have the right to bring a wrongful death action only if the decedent is unmarried and without descendants. Under CRS § 13-21-201(1)(c)(I), the relevant time for determining if an adult deceased is "unmarried" is the decedent's date of death. Here, it was undisputed that when Wife died, she was married to Husband, and Husband survived her. The Court of Appeals also granted Barron's request for attorney fees. The judgment was affirmed and the case was remanded with directions for a determination of the appropriate amount of attorney fees incurred on appeal.

The trial court did not err by entering summary judgment for Appellees on Appellant's claim for workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained in an assault. Appellant did not receive his injuries "in the course of" his employment, and the injuries did not "arise out of" his employment. While the assault occurred in the employee parking lot, it occurred outside working hours, was committed by a non-employee, and was the result of an entirely personal dispute. Judgment affirmed.

Negligence independent contractor frequenter open and obvious. Owner of premises had no duty to warn independent contractor of dangers posed by unguarded fan because the evidence showed that the independent contractor was aware of the unguarded fan and nevertheless put his hand into the fan to check to see if the fan was operating.

The litigants, a municipality and a union, are parties to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) which, among other things, governs union members' overtime compensation. The parties, as required by the CBA, submitted an overtime dispute to binding arbitration with the arbitrator ruling in the union's favor. The trial court vacated the arbitration award finding that the arbitrator, by ignoring unambiguous contractual language, exceeded his authority. The arbitrator's decision is consistent with a reasonable, appropriate interpretation of the contested contractual language thus, the arbitrator did not exceed his authority. Judgment reversed and remanded.

Trial court did not err when it denied appellant's application for a concealed carry license (CCL) based upon three felony convictions for which he been pardoned by the governor of Ohio. Significantly, his pardon does not equate with a sealing or expungement of his convictions pursuant to sections 2151.355 to 2151.358, sections 2953.31 to 2953.36, or section 2953.37 of the Revised Code. Since appellant was not convicted of a felony "offense of violence" pursuant to R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), none of his felony convictions caused him to be placed under disability to carry or possess a firearm pursuant to R.C. 2923.13. Because appellant was not under disability, there is no disability to remove. Thus, the pardon did not relieve appellant "under operation of law or legal process from any disability imposed pursuant to section 2923.13 of the Revised Code." R.C. 2923.125(D)(4). Therefore, the sheriff was required to consider Runions's unsealed felony convictions in finding him not qualified for a CCL. Judgment affirmed.

Res judicata

The trial court erred in awarding appellee attorney fees for alleged frivolous conduct by appellant pursuant to R.C. 2323.51(A)(2)(a)(ii). The court sustains appellant's assignment of error that the trial court erred in finding appellant's claims of age discrimination were not warranted under existing law as it cannot find that "no reasonable lawyer would have brought the action in light of existing law." Judgment reversed.

Core Terms: public record court of claims R.C. 2743.75 R.C. 149.43 trade secret. Overview: Requester sought data, statistics and maps prepared by regional planning organization for inclusion in a bid to host a second national headquarters for Amazon, Inc. Respondent argued that the records were trade secret in their entirety. The special master recommended the court find that no part of the records were trade secret.

Motion for summary judgment Civ.R. 56 fellow employee immunity R.C. 4123.471 injury occurring in the course of and arising out of the plaintiff's employment. - Judgment affirmed. The trial court properly determined that the fellow employee immunity statute applied to the instant case. First, the injury was caused by another employee. There is no dispute that both plaintiff and defendant were employees at Hose Master, and plaintiff was injured as a result of the accident. Second, the injury occurred in the course of and arising out of plaintiff's employment. There is no dispute that plaintiff was awarded workers' compensation benefits for the injuries he sustained from the accident with the defendant.

Court of Claims of Ohio does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate issues governed by a collective bargaining agreement because it had no jurisdiction over the claim. The Court of Claims could not grant summary judgment of any party but had to dismiss the claim.

This matter arises out of administrative proceedings adjudging student allegations of inappropriate behavior by high school teacher James Viner. Following a full evidentiary hearing before the North Kingstown School Committee resulting in a decision to suspend Viner without pay for the 2015-2016 the school year and terminate his employment immediately thereafter "for good and just cause," Viner appealed that decision to the commissioner of elementary and secondary education within the Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (RIDE). The RIDE hearing officer granted Viner's subpoena requests for documents and the testimony of two attorneys acting as legal counsel for the North Kingstown School Committee. In response, the school committee filed a miscellaneous petition to quash the subpoenas in the Superior Court. The hearing justice granted in part and denied in part the school committee's petition to quash three subpoenas. On appeal to the Supreme Court, Viner challenged the hearing justice's grant of the school committee's petition to quash the subpoenas compelling the testimony of the attorneys. He contended that the hearing justice applied the attorney-client privilege to the attorneys' anticipated testimony in an overly broad manner when he failed to make question-by-question privilege determinations. The Supreme Court held that to ensure that the attorney-client privilege remains strictly confined, the question of attorney-client privilege should be remanded to the Superior Court in order for the attorneys to testify either in person or by deposition and the school committee to assert a claim of privilege on a question-by-question basis. Following the hearing justice's privilege determination, any party in interest may request the RIDE hearing officer to reopen the evidence to receive any testimony from the attorneys that has been deemed to be nonprivileged by the hearing justice. Accordingly, the Supreme Court vacated the Superior Court ju

Although the trial court erred as a matter of law in finding a contract ambiguous where the express terms of the contract contained an agreement to arbitrate, the error was harmless as the record supports the trial court's determination that the defendant waived its right to arbitration by participating in the litigation in a manner inconsistent with the right to arbitrate.

Core Terms: public record court of claims R.C. 2743.75 R.C. 149.43(B)(8) inmate law enforcement investigatory records incarceration subsequent to request. Overview: Requester sought criminal law enforcement investigatory records maintained by respondent. Requester was on probation pursuant to criminal conviction at the time of the request, but violated probation and was incarcerated by the time the special master rendered determination. The special master recommended a finding that the requested records were excepted from disclosure by R.C. 149.43(B)(8), as the exception is one that may be based on the facts and circumstances at the time of the determination.

Foreclosure mortgage admissibility of exhibits standing default notice of default. The trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the foreclosing bank.