FIRST DISTRICT

COURT OF APPEALS

        

THESE SUMMARIES ARE NEITHER APPROVED IN ADVANCE NOR ENDORSED BY THE COURT.  THEY ARE NOT HEADNOTES OR SYLLABI.  INTERESTED PARTIES SHOULD OBTAIN COPIES OF THE ACTUAL DECISIONS FROM THE CLERK OF THE COURT OF APPEALS.

 

DATE: Friday, April 11, 2025

CAPTION: STATE V. SCUDDER

APPEAL NO.: C-240343 

TRIAL NO.: C/23/TRC/25767/A

KEY WORDS: NO-CONTEST PLEA — OVI — WAIVER — R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(j)(ix) — EXPLANATION OF CIRCUMSTANCES – R.C. 2937.07

SUMMARY: The trial court erred in finding defendant guilty of operating a motor vehicle with a specific concentration of methamphetamine in his urine following a no-contest plea to R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(j)(ix) where the State’s explanation of circumstances did not identify the substance or its amount that was present in defendant’s system, either expressly or by implication.

Defendant did not explicitly and clearly waive the explanation-of-circumstances requirement under R.C. 2937.07 by indicating that he did not want to hear the facts following his no-contest plea. 

JUDGMENT: REVERSED AND APPELLANT DISCHARGED

JUDGES: OPINION by KINSLEY, P.J.; BOCK and NESTOR, JJ., CONCUR.

 

CAPTION: MARSHALL V. MERCY HEALTH-ANDERSON HOSPITAL, L.L.C.

APPEAL NO.: C-240520 

TRIAL NO.: A-2103081

KEY WORDS: RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR – VICARIOUS LIABILITY 

SUMMARY: Where plaintiff sued defendant hospital but not its employee nurse, the trial court erred when it granted summary judgment in favor of defendant because vicarious-liability exceptions pertaining to suits involving physicians and hospitals do not apply in cases involving a hospital and its nurse employee.

JUDGMENT: REVERSED AND CAUSE REMANDED

JUDGES: OPINION by NESTOR, J.; KINSLEY, P.J., and BOCK, J., CONCUR.