Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Printable version; In other projects Wikidata item; Appearance. move to sidebar hide. Help. Pages in category "Supreme Court of Ohio cases" The following 3 pages are ...
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".
Megan E. Shanahan (born 1972 or 1973) [1] is an American lawyer who has served as a justice of the Ohio Supreme Court since 2025. She served as a judge of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas from 2015 to 2024.
The Supreme Court of the State of Ohio is the highest court in the U.S. state of Ohio, with final authority over interpretations of Ohio law and the Ohio Constitution. The court has seven members, a chief justice and six associate justices, who are elected at large by the voters of Ohio for six-year terms. The court has a total of 1,550 other ...
Two of the judges appointed to hear O'Toole's case, [Judge Patrick F. Fischer and Judge Vernon L. Preston,] had dissented in the O'Neill case. [8] The Ohio Supreme Court fined O'Toole and ordered her to pay the complainant's attorney's fees. [9] Justice Paul E. Pfeifer, concurring in part and dissenting in part, wrote the following
The court concluded, “[i]t is true that the case law was clear at the time of Wells’s request that Lakota could redact the narrative portion of the invoice but not more. . . .
Once again, it's a pivotal year for control of the Ohio Supreme Court, which will likely decide how the new abortion rights constitutional amendment should be interpreted.. Republicans have held a ...
City of Norwood v. Horney, 110 Ohio St.3d 353 (2006), was a case brought before the Ohio Supreme Court in 2006. The case came upon the heels of Kelo v.City of New London, in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that commercial development justified the use of eminent domain.