11.04.2014 Views

Supreme Court of Ohio 2006 Annual Report - Supreme Court - State ...

Supreme Court of Ohio 2006 Annual Report - Supreme Court - State ...

Supreme Court of Ohio 2006 Annual Report - Supreme Court - State ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Orders the Public Utilities Commission<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>Ohio</strong> to revisit a previously adopted<br />

plan approving the setting <strong>of</strong> service<br />

rates for three <strong>Ohio</strong> electric companies<br />

owned by FirstEnergy Corporation to<br />

comply with certain legislative provisions.<br />

Public Utilities Commission, No. 03-<br />

2144-EL-ATA. Decision affirmed in<br />

part and reversed in part, and cause<br />

remanded.<br />

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer,<br />

Lundberg Stratton and O’Donnell,<br />

JJ., concur.<br />

O’Connor and Lanzinger, JJ., concur<br />

in part and dissent in part.<br />

Smith v. Conley<br />

Case no. 2005-0247<br />

Web cite <strong>2006</strong>-<strong>Ohio</strong>-2035<br />

Holds that, in calculating the time<br />

limit within which a client must<br />

file a malpractice action against an<br />

attorney, the date on which the lawyerclient<br />

relationship was terminated is<br />

determined by reference to the actions<br />

<strong>of</strong> the parties under statutory provisions<br />

and case law, not by the date <strong>of</strong> the<br />

attorney’s compliance with a local rule<br />

<strong>of</strong> court governing withdrawal from<br />

representation.<br />

Stark App. No. 2004CA00068, 2004-<br />

<strong>Ohio</strong>-7057. Judgment reversed.<br />

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer,<br />

O’Connor, O’Donnell and<br />

Lanzinger, JJ., concur.<br />

Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents.<br />

Davenport v. Montgomery Cty.<br />

Case no. 2005-0074<br />

Web cite <strong>2006</strong>-<strong>Ohio</strong>-2034<br />

To invoke the state law granting public<br />

employees the option to convert unused<br />

sick-leave hours to cash at the time <strong>of</strong><br />

retirement from active service, a worker<br />

must remain in public employment until<br />

meeting eligibility requirements for the<br />

public employee retirement program.<br />

The provision does not apply to workers<br />

who leave before they are eligible to<br />

retire.<br />

Montgomery App. No. 20350, 2004-<br />

<strong>Ohio</strong>-6781. Judgment reversed.<br />

Moyer, C.J., Lundberg Stratton,<br />

O’Connor, O’Donnell and<br />

Lanzinger, JJ., concur.<br />

Resnick and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.<br />

Reading v. Pub. Util. Comm.<br />

Case no. 2005-0245<br />

Web cite <strong>2006</strong>-<strong>Ohio</strong>-2181<br />

The state law authorizing the Public<br />

Utilities Commission <strong>of</strong> <strong>Ohio</strong> to close<br />

a railroad grade crossing within the<br />

boundaries <strong>of</strong> a municipality, despite<br />

the opposition <strong>of</strong> local <strong>of</strong>ficials, does<br />

not violate the municipality’s right to<br />

exercise police powers within its borders<br />

under the home-rule provision <strong>of</strong> the<br />

<strong>Ohio</strong> Constitution.<br />

Public Utilities Commission, No. 02-<br />

589-RR-UNC. Order affirmed.<br />

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg<br />

Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and<br />

Lanzinger, JJ., concur.<br />

Pfeifer, J., concurs in judgment only.<br />

Sharonville v. Am. Employers Ins. Co.<br />

Case no. 2004-1735<br />

Web cite <strong>2006</strong>-<strong>Ohio</strong>-2180<br />

If an insurance company issues a<br />

law enforcement liability policy, the<br />

insurance company has a duty to defend<br />

the policyholder against a lawsuit<br />

when a claimant’s complaint contains<br />

an allegation <strong>of</strong> conduct arguably<br />

considered covered by the policy.<br />

Hamilton App. No. C-030905, 158<br />

<strong>Ohio</strong> App.3d 576, 2004-<strong>Ohio</strong>-4664.<br />

Judgment affirmed.<br />

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer,<br />

Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and<br />

Lanzinger, JJ., concur.<br />

89

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!