{"count":95703,"next":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/search/?cursor=cz0zOS4zNjMxMTcmcz00NDI3NTMyJnQ9byZkPTIwMjYtMDktMzAmcD0y&q=COMPENSATORY+DAMAGES&type=o","previous":null,"results":[{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9405849/paldino-v-johnson/","attorney":"","caseName":"Paldino v. Johnson","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2023 Ohio 1947"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":9405849,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-06-12","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2022-T-0116","docket_id":67494021,"judge":"Lynch","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T01:07:59.296168Z","date_created":"2023-06-12T19:09:41.825960Z","score":{"bm25":54.31318}},"neutralCite":"2023 Ohio 1947","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[3689013,4262403,4663259,6759958,6762996,6792693,8213394,8482129],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2023/2023-Ohio-1947.pdf","id":9401325,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/06/12/paldino_v._johnson.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-12-05T07:59:24.549051Z","date_created":"2023-06-12T19:09:41.832142Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"49e81cf2a5dea02b246c23538bcff287d29e5d31","snippet":"[Cite as Paldino v. Johnson, 2023-Ohio-1947.]\n\n\n\n                 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                           ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                TRUMBULL COUNTY\n\nMATTHEW PALDINO,                                       CASE NO. 2022-T-0116\n\n                 Plaintiff-Appellant,\n                                                       Civil Appeal from the\n        - vs -                                         Court of Common Pleas\n\nROBERT L. JOHNSON, et al.,\n ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9401325],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"CIVIL - legal malpractice compensatory damages attorney fees reasonableness punitive damages malice"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9408362/southland-natl-ins-corp-v-lindberg/","attorney":"","caseName":"Southland Nat'l Ins. Corp. v. Lindberg","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":9408362,"court":"Court of Appeals of North Carolina","court_citation_string":"N.C. Ct. App.","court_id":"ncctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-06-20","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"22-1049","docket_id":67511601,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T01:08:45.071982Z","date_created":"2023-06-21T19:09:59.544112Z","score":{"bm25":51.53428}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1211710,1221163,1224095,1243338,1252091,1262898,1264463,1283653,1316482,1321796,1329061,1366508,1394062,1403762,1403771,1403969,1410050,2502290,3004784,3643541,3651435,3662574,3665492],"download_url":"http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=42358","id":9403838,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/06/20/southland_natl_ins._corp._v._lindberg_1.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T05:55:04.448899Z","date_created":"2023-06-21T19:09:59.545479Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"100913c7154d71bf7aa041192f5c7ef0857b3086","snippet":"             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA\n\n                                 No. COA22-1049\n\n                                Filed 20 June 2023\n\nWake County, No. 19CVS13093\n\nSOUTHLAND NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION in Rehabilitation,\nBANKERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY in Rehabilitation, COLORADO\nBANKERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, in Rehabilitation, and SOUTHLAND\nNATIONAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION, in Rehabilitation, Plaintiffs,\n\n            v.\n\nGREG E. LINDBERG, GLOBAL GROWTH HOLDINGS, INC. f","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9403838],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"breach fraud fraudulent inducement main purpose remedies severability compensatory damages punitive damages specific performance cross appeal judicial notice"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10032190/chappell-v-webb/","attorney":"","caseName":"Chappell v. Webb","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":10032190,"court":"Court of Appeals of North Carolina","court_citation_string":"N.C. Ct. App.","court_id":"ncctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-08-06","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"24-23","docket_id":69017366,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-08-06T12:04:13.004928Z","date_created":"2024-08-06T12:04:12.964574Z","score":{"bm25":49.675636}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1229825,1233070,1253839,1312667,1315958,1375865,1380855,2677926,4204366,4207701,4568369,4697997,8900946,9434419,9562302,9565261,9576516,9598041,9887796],"download_url":"http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=43592","id":10498791,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/08/06/chappell_v._webb.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-12-02T18:27:56.234005Z","date_created":"2024-08-06T12:04:12.966399Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"fc7290b757bcd5548c9aa3228a7b1e62fd85ec7f","snippet":"              IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA\n\n                                    No. COA24-23\n\n                                 Filed 6 August 2024\n\nFranklin County, No. 21 CVS 470\n\nSANDRA CHAPPELL, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF SUSAN RENEE\nCHAPPELL (deceased), Plaintiff,\n\n             v.\n\nSHEMARO DEANN WEBB and LADOROTHY BREANNA FOREMAN, Defendants.\n\n\n      Appeal by defendants from judgment entered 28 April 2023 by Judge Cynthia\n\nK. Sturges in Franklin County Superior Court. Heard","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10498791],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"drunk driving, wrongful death lawsuit, judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), motion for new trial, negligent entrustment, compensatory damages, punitive damages"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9407567/southland-natl-ins-corp-v-lindberg/","attorney":"","caseName":"Southland Nat'l Ins. Corp. v. Lindberg","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":9407567,"court":"Court of Appeals of North Carolina","court_citation_string":"N.C. Ct. App.","court_id":"ncctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-06-20","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"22-1049","docket_id":67511601,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T01:08:30.761608Z","date_created":"2023-06-20T12:06:34.242602Z","score":{"bm25":47.65055}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1211710,1221163,1224095,1243338,1252091,1262898,1264463,1283653,1316482,1321796,1329061,1366508,1394062,1403762,1403771,1403969,1410050,2502290,3004784,3643541,3651435,3662574,3665492],"download_url":"http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=42358","id":9403043,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/06/20/southland_natl_ins._corp._v._lindberg.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T20:25:26.629128Z","date_created":"2023-06-20T12:06:34.243839Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"f5dcd8c68401c1401b6ce5612f04f3aa556b5936","snippet":"             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA\n\n                                 No. COA22-1049\n\n                                Filed 20 June 2023\n\nWake County, No. 19CVS13093\n\nSOUTHLAND NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION in Rehabilitation,\nBANKERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY in Rehabilitation, COLORADO\nBANKERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, in Rehabilitation, and SOUTHLAND\nNATIONAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION, in Rehabilitation, Plaintiffs,\n\n            v.\n\nGREG E. LINDBERG, GLOBAL GROWTH HOLDINGS, INC. f","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9403043],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"breach fraud fraudulent inducement main purpose remedies severability compensatory damages punitive damages specific performance cross appeal judicial notice"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4688677/doerschuk-v-klg-mobile-intensive-co-llc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Doerschuk v. KLG Mobile Intensive Co., L.L.C.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2019 Ohio 5248"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":4688677,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2019-12-12","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"18 CO 0041","docket_id":16608246,"judge":"Donofrio","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:56:19.136984Z","date_created":"2019-12-19T18:11:18.801747Z","score":{"bm25":47.642372}},"neutralCite":"2019 Ohio 5248","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8079,"cites":[2700540],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/7/2019/2019-Ohio-5248.pdf","id":4465930,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2019/12/12/doerschuk_v._klg_mobile_intensive_co._l.l.c..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T18:11:50.262184Z","date_created":"2019-12-19T18:11:18.820849Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"edd1df8fceffbebf81b6af9ca36f76b1f2c6dc88","snippet":"[Cite as Doerschuk v. KLG Mobile Intensive Co., L.L.C., 2019-Ohio-5248.]\n\n\n\n\n             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                            SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                               COLUMBIANA COUNTY\n\n                             MATTHEW J. DOERSCHUK DBA\n                                  KLG AMBULANCE,\n\n                                         Plaintiff-Appellant,\n\n                                                    v.\n\n                           KLG MOBILE INTENSIVE CO","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4465930],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"compensatory damages punitive damages attorney's fees awarded as an element of compensatory damages bench trial manifest weight of the evidence."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4584030/chuparkoff-v-ohio-title-loans/","attorney":"","caseName":"Chuparkoff v. Ohio Title Loans","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2019 Ohio 209"],"citeCount":3,"cluster_id":4584030,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2019-01-23","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"29008","docket_id":13589410,"judge":"Schafer","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:26:10.770125Z","date_created":"2019-01-23T22:19:24.427549Z","score":{"bm25":45.756584}},"neutralCite":"2019 Ohio 209","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2705480,2706416,2706476,3185432,4118428],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/9/2019/2019-Ohio-209.pdf","id":4361283,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2019/01/23/chuparkoff_v._ohio_title_loans.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T16:59:11.775572Z","date_created":"2019-01-23T22:19:24.448114Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"485b26e86eab376646911d4e2018e3a8d3a38d35","snippet":"[Cite as Chuparkoff v. Ohio Title Loans, 2019-Ohio-209.]\n\n\nSTATE OF OHIO                    )                         IN THE COURT OF APPEALS\n                                 )ss:                      NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT\nCOUNTY OF SUMMIT                 )\n\nTED CHUPARKOFF                                             C.A. No.   29008\n\n        Appellant\n\n        v.                                                 APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT\n                                                           ENTE","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4361283],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Civ.R. 55, default judgment, magistrate decision, manifest weight of the evidence, conversion, unjust enrichment, compensatory damages, testimonial evidence, punitive damages"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/6456743/gibson-bros-inc-v-oberlin-college/","attorney":"","caseName":"Gibson Bros., Inc. v. Oberlin College","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2022 Ohio 1079"],"citeCount":6,"cluster_id":6456743,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-03-31","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"19CA011563 & 20CA011632","docket_id":63203463,"judge":"Carr","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T09:44:20.217097Z","date_created":"2022-03-31T17:11:59.878781Z","score":{"bm25":45.512524}},"neutralCite":"2022 Ohio 1079","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8066,"cites":[2486819,2690766,2691095,2706616,2717639,3702429,3704778,3739704,3756700,3777050,3778779,3782321,4099027,4306063,4328441,4348308,4394776,4519259,4520607,4545172,4570267,6679723,6754479,6756480,6756850,6758010,6758147,6759435,6759635,6759822,6759912,6762040,6762975,6767262,6769618,6770895,6778129,6785385,6790466,9425816,9431784,9432641,9433294,9477381,9782689,9801195,9801599,9801681,9870278,11152670],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/9/2022/2022-Ohio-1079.pdf","id":6328854,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/03/31/gibson_bros._inc._v._oberlin_college.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-27T19:21:30.938755Z","date_created":"2022-03-31T17:11:59.893987Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"4b0e4007cd8e8090c32cf4633525041c2e714df9","snippet":"[Cite as Gibson Bros., Inc. v. Oberlin College, 2022-Ohio-1079.]\n\n\nSTATE OF OHIO                     )                         IN THE COURT OF APPEALS\n                                  )ss:                      NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT\nCOUNTY OF LORAIN                  )\n\nGIBSON BROS., INC., et al.                                  C.A. Nos.   19CA011563\n                                                                        20CA011632\n        Appellees/Cross-Appellants\n\n        v.\n               ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[6328854],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"libel constitutionally protected opinion publication limited purpose public figure preserving alleged error in jury instruction on appeal, compensatory damages, punitive damages"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9769248/angel-aguilar-v-eads-auto-sales/","attorney":"","caseName":"Angel Aguilar v. Eads Auto Sales","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":9769248,"court":"Court of Appeals of Tennessee","court_citation_string":"Tenn. Ct. App.","court_id":"tennctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-06-24","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"W2023-00914-COA-R3-CV","docket_id":68879287,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-25T09:47:44.238152Z","date_created":"2024-06-24T17:10:47.329545Z","score":{"bm25":44.5339}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1053516,1055585,1670818,2189030,2362606,2364301],"download_url":"https://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/OpinionsPDFVersion/AguilarAngelOPN.pdf","id":10235860,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/06/24/angel_aguilar_v._eads_auto_sales.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T16:50:22.312650Z","date_created":"2024-06-24T17:10:47.334199Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"f1164cdaa714b3d274627c5ff5ef73e33f2a6c90","snippet":"                                                                                                       06/24/2024\n                   IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE\n                                AT JACKSON\n                                       April 10, 2024 Session\n\n                  ANGEL AGUILAR ET AL. v. EADS AUTO SALES\n\n                      Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County\n                        No. CT-4861-22     Gina C. Higgins, Judge\n                         ____","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10235860],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"In an appeal from a general sessions court judgment, the trial court awarded the plaintiffs compensatory damages for a misrepresentation by a car dealer, declined to award treble damages, and awarded the plaintiffs only a portion of their attorney's fees. Both parties appeal. We vacate the denial of treble damages, but otherwise affirm the decision of the trial court."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/5296174/balalovski-v-tanevski/","attorney":"","caseName":"Balalovski v. Tanevski","caseNameFull":"","citation":["180 N.E.3d 1230","2021 Ohio 3990"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":5296174,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2021-11-09","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"20AP-447","docket_id":60829392,"judge":"Brown","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T17:54:53.141419Z","date_created":"2021-11-09T21:12:22.426309Z","score":{"bm25":43.586174}},"neutralCite":"2021 Ohio 3990","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8060,"cites":[2696579,2696594,2696745,2696838,2767570,3189543,3712844,3730424,3735426,3736579,3742643,3778873,4105168,4320407,6756298,6784684,8621454,11152889],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/10/2021/2021-Ohio-3990.pdf","id":5124736,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2021/11/09/balalovski_v._tanevski.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-27T13:51:52.422191Z","date_created":"2021-11-09T21:12:22.440774Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"63b0c07ba16fc2e0812c870f5de5bf4eb3517067","snippet":"[Cite as Balalovski v. Tanevski, 2021-Ohio-3990.]\n\n                              IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                                   TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n\nAleksandar S. Balalovski,                           :\n\n                 Plaintiff-Appellee,                :\n                                                              No. 20AP-447\nv.                                                  :     (C.P.C. No. 17CV-11123)\n\nDance Tanevski,                                     :    ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[5124736],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Trial court did not err in overruling appellant's objections and adopting decision of magistrate finding sufficient evidence that appellee and appellant entered into four oral loan agreements totaling $25,000, and that appellee proved entitlement to compensatory damages in the amount of $17,250."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10326150/brake-v-dolezal/","attorney":"","caseName":"Brake v. Dolezal","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2025 Ohio 338"],"citeCount":2,"cluster_id":10326150,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2025-02-03","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2024-A-0060","docket_id":69605494,"judge":"Eklund","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-02-03T18:15:27.360837Z","date_created":"2025-02-03T18:15:27.287509Z","score":{"bm25":41.74566}},"neutralCite":"2025 Ohio 338","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2696102,6753834,6759175,7799798,9896642],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2025/2025-Ohio-338.pdf","id":10792738,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2025/02/03/brake_v._dolezal.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T19:04:38.511077Z","date_created":"2025-02-03T18:15:27.304573Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"4d6fb7978c115e19fb58a0198f4d323fe204ad2a","snippet":"[Cite as Brake v. Dolezal, 2025-Ohio-338.]\n\n\n                    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                     ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                           ASHTABULA COUNTY\n\nJESSICA BRAKE,                                     CASE NO. 2024-A-0060\n\n                 Plaintiff-Appellee,\n                                                   Civil Appeal from the\n        - vs -                                     County Court, Western Division\n\nCHARLES DOLEZAL, et al.,\n                  ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10792738],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"CIVIL – Small claims court; wrongful dominion over property; R.C. 2307.60; R.C. 2307.61; landlord failed to restore personal property after eviction; trial court did not err in judgment awarding compensatory damages for personal property; small claims court does not have jurisdiction to order replevin; R.C. 1925.02; small claims court did not err in considering an inventory of property; Evid.R. 101(D)(8); weight of the evidence."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9355864/boyd-v-boyd/","attorney":"","caseName":"Boyd v. Boyd","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2022 Ohio 4775"],"citeCount":6,"cluster_id":9355864,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-12-29","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"21AP-474 & 21AP-669","docket_id":66690083,"judge":"Mentel","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T00:55:17.550301Z","date_created":"2022-12-29T22:08:39.924697Z","score":{"bm25":41.655266}},"neutralCite":"2022 Ohio 4775","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2690234,2706697,3170374,3699913,3701770,3715325,3718608,3723140,3726892,3729667,3732498,3735128,3760512,3761399,3774247,4284017,4372375,4402517,4533650,4533771,4641858,4670625,4690848,4910748,5133798,6326654,6349732,6351708,6755140,6756334,6757845,6757937,6758010,6758292,6758664,6759387,6760164,6760271,6762597,6762913,6783124,6789941,6798910,9424818,9887167,11149764,11150180],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/10/2022/2022-Ohio-4775.pdf","id":9351336,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/12/29/boyd_v._boyd.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-28T06:14:20.421342Z","date_created":"2022-12-29T22:08:39.930366Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"edefd781f50b8c937ce2ef87a1515f87cd54aff1","snippet":"[Cite as Boyd v. Boyd, 2022-Ohio-4775.]\n\n\n                             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                                  TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n\nKristin C. Boyd (n.k.a. Dillard),                :\n\n                Plaintiff-Appellee,              :            Nos. 21AP-474\n                                                                    &\nv.                                               :              21AP-669\n                                                            (C.P","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9351336],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Based on the evidence in the record and appellant's repeated acknowledgment that he failed to pay on the home equity line of credit, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion by finding appellant in contempt. The trial court, however, abused its discretion awarding appellee $15,000 in compensatory damages. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's motion to approve the purchase offer. Judgment affirmed, in part, reversed in part, and cause remanded with instructions."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4419117/latisia-upshaw-v-sunrise-community-of-tennessee-inc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Latisia Upshaw v. Sunrise Community Of Tennessee, Inc.","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":4419117,"court":"Court of Appeals of Tennessee","court_citation_string":"Tenn. Ct. App.","court_id":"tennctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2017-08-16","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"E2016-01005-COA-R3-CV","docket_id":6138793,"judge":"Judge John W. McClarty","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T00:40:02.425347Z","date_created":"2017-08-16T17:10:54.501263Z","score":{"bm25":41.156033}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8278,"cites":[1044019,1057977,1060588,1060858,1061009,1354425,1683708,1747492,1785111,1872536,2170502,2173281,2196243,2372597,2462267,2468203,2469658,2603584,3893278],"download_url":"http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/sites/default/files/latisia_upshaw_v._sunrise_community_of_tennessee_inc..pdf","id":4196370,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2017/08/16/latisia_upshaw_v._sunrise_community_of_tennessee_inc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T15:04:21.772694Z","date_created":"2017-08-16T17:10:54.511606Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"fe43260d3d90ca83b57dc098c1ba6edbc45d414c","snippet":"                                                                                      08/16/2017\n               IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE\n                          AT KNOXVILLE\n                              January 24, 2017 Session\n\n  LATISIA UPSHAW v. SUNRISE COMMUNITY OF TENNESSEE, INC.\n\n                  Appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County\n                     No. 3-491-11 Deborah C. Stevens, Judge\n                     ___________________________________\n\n                ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4196370],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"This appeal concerns a claim of retaliatory discharge. After a trial before a jury, judgment was entered against the defendant employer. The plaintiff was awarded $225,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages. The employer appeals. We affirm."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10025220/swain-v-united-automobile-insurance-co/","attorney":"","caseName":"SWAIN v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2024 OK CIV APP 15"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":10025220,"court":"Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma","court_citation_string":"Okla. Civ. App.","court_id":"oklacivapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-12-21","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"120117","docket_id":68965158,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-09-23T21:27:41.321610Z","date_created":"2024-07-31T05:10:44.016574Z","score":{"bm25":41.095886}},"neutralCite":"2024 OK CIV APP 15","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1148749,1170943,1251865,1361630,1402185,1417117,2097447,2581671,2606947,2632366,2638181,4689847,4910560,5154324,5645655,10477331],"download_url":"https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=495553","id":10491821,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"html/2023/12/21/swain_v._united_automobile_insurance_co._1.html","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T17:44:38.377882Z","date_created":"2024-07-31T05:10:44.025786Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"ad77d9a802a9332fe2e0f333734c74133fc789a4","snippet":"\n\t\t\nOSCN Found Document:SWAIN v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\n  \n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tPrevious Case\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tTop Of Index\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tThis Point in Index\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tCitationize\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tNext Case\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tPrint Only\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10491821],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"¶1 United Automobile Insurance Company appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict in which the jury awarded Karen Swain compensatory damages for United's breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and punitive damages, and the trial court's award of attorney fees. We reverse and remand with directions to enter judgment for United."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9493583/smith-v-perkins/","attorney":"","caseName":"Smith v. Perkins","caseNameFull":"","citation":["241 N.E.3d 889","2024 Ohio 1419"],"citeCount":6,"cluster_id":9493583,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-04-15","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"5-23-18","docket_id":68436214,"judge":"Zimmerman","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:21:31.002691Z","date_created":"2024-04-15T17:09:50.884380Z","score":{"bm25":40.8623}},"neutralCite":"2024 Ohio 1419","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2694086,2696242,2696309,2696372,2696436,2696740,2697145,2706847,2707762,2744510,3688677,3696870,3697752,3740512,3749413,3758945,3768176,3771681,3777585,4167915,4466419,4507198,4508302,4693263,4911040,6114105,6700310,6756887,6758010,6758188,6758238,6759070,6759135,6759617,6759958,6765418,6789759,8209609,8621310,9375951],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/3/2024/2024-Ohio-1419.pdf","id":9960196,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/04/15/smith_v._perkins.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:21:30.957211Z","date_created":"2024-04-15T17:09:50.907365Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"6fd496fc38072f2b7eb8a7a1d2307977b213e4f1","snippet":"[Cite as Smith v. Perkins, 2024-Ohio-1419.]\n\n\n\n\n                      IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                          THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                              HANCOCK COUNTY\n\n\n\n\nKELTON K. SMITH,\n                                                          CASE NO. 5-23-18\n         PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,\n\n    v.\n\nJOEL PERKINS,                                             OPINION\n\n         DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.\n\n\n\n                         Appeal from Findlay Municipal Court\n       ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9960196],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"DEFAULT JUDGMENT CIV.R. 55 COMPENSATORY DAMAGES PUNITIVE DAMAGES CIV.R. 36 REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS MOTION TO STRIKE MOTION IN LIMINE. Because the grounds for granting a Civ.R. 36(B) motion were satisfied, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by proceeding with a hearing on the issue of damages. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by granting a default judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellant and awarding him $250.00 in compensatory damages. The trial court's damages award is not against the manifest weight of the evidence."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10304969/robert-ferguson-v-m-brown-construction-inc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Robert Ferguson v. M. Brown Construction, Inc.","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":10304969,"court":"Court of Appeals of Tennessee","court_citation_string":"Tenn. Ct. App.","court_id":"tennctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-12-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"M2022-01637-COA-R3-CV","docket_id":69500100,"judge":"Judge W. Neal McBrayer","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-12-27T16:13:13.126809Z","date_created":"2024-12-27T16:13:13.067840Z","score":{"bm25":40.51585}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8277,"cites":[1047297,1050219,1050452,1050576,1053423,1073808,1508314,1519058,1576163,1637954,1678373,1733218,2444996,3892664,3893958,7654079],"download_url":"https://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/OpinionsPDFVersion/Majority%20Opinion%20-%20M2022-01637-COA-R3-CV.pdf","id":10771557,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/12/27/robert_ferguson_v._m._brown_construction_inc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T18:57:32.817599Z","date_created":"2024-12-27T16:13:13.079701Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"91aa0ec3bf86c7fcdbd49bb4e3620f4f5b6b928c","snippet":"                                                                                          12/27/2024\n               IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE\n                           AT NASHVILLE\n                               November 7, 2023 Session\n\n    ROBERT FERGUSON v. M. BROWN CONSTRUCTION, INC. ET AL.\n\n                Appeal from the Circuit Court for Cheatham County\n                       No. 6442     Larry J. Wallace, Judge\n                     ___________________________________\n\n       ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10771557],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"A property owner hired a local contractor to build a custom-designed home. A payment dispute arose midway through construction, and the contractor stopped working. The owner paid others to repair and complete the home. Then he filed suit against the contractor asserting multiple theories of recovery. Among other things, the trial court found the contractor liable for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation. As compensatory damages, it awarded the owner the additional costs he incurred to repair and complete the home above the contract price. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for recalculation of compensatory damages."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4519506/germadnik-v-auld/","attorney":"","caseName":"Germadnik v. Auld","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2018 Ohio 2889"],"citeCount":105,"cluster_id":4519506,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2018-07-23","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2017-T-0113","docket_id":7495630,"judge":"Cannon","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:07:45.770809Z","date_created":"2018-07-23T18:25:57.857739Z","score":{"bm25":40.34355}},"neutralCite":"2018 Ohio 2889","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8065,"cites":[],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2018/2018-Ohio-2889.pdf","id":4296759,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2018/07/23/germadnik_v._auld.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T16:14:10.855119Z","date_created":"2018-07-23T18:25:57.917525Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"89a6d68522c40f0c657d6dd0abc80e7487f25602","snippet":"[Cite as Germadnik v. Auld, 2018-Ohio-2889.]\n\n\n                                   IN THE COURT OF APPEALS\n\n                                ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n                                    TRUMBULL COUNTY, OHIO\n\n\n RON GERMADNIK,                                  :        OPINION\n\n                  Plaintiff-Appellant,           :\n                                                          CASE NO. 2017-T-0113\n         - vs -                                  :\n\n ERIN AULD,            ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4296759],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"CIVIL - landlord tenant rental payments late fees counterclaim unlawful eviction security deposit personal property compensatory damages demand for relief Civ.R. 54(C) Civ.R. 15(B) punitive damages small claims division limited subject matter jurisdiction R.C. 1925.02(A)."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/7854451/christopher-mccoy-v-katelyn-conway/","attorney":"","caseName":"Christopher McCoy v. Katelyn Conway","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":7854451,"court":"Court of Appeals of Tennessee","court_citation_string":"Tenn. Ct. App.","court_id":"tennctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-08-05","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"M2021-00921-COA-R3-CV","docket_id":64872152,"judge":"Western Section Presiding Judge, J. Steven Stafford","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T16:01:22.059746Z","date_created":"2022-08-05T16:11:55.165868Z","score":{"bm25":40.324913}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8279,"cites":[1052543,1057688,1057787,1079448,1467184,1534422,1672524,1732541,1959826,2333872,2372839,2408661,5045918,5063435,5086176],"download_url":"https://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/christopher.mccoy_.opn_.pdf","id":7798317,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/08/05/christopher_mccoy_v._katelyn_conway.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T13:39:30.626373Z","date_created":"2022-08-05T16:11:55.178075Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"72dd4eab36bf2c4f5841b3bb2bbc3b0c31867398","snippet":"                                                                                                         08/05/2022\n                   IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE\n                               AT NASHVILLE\n                                        May 17, 2022 Session\n\n            CHRISTOPHER MCCOY v. KATELYN CONWAY ET AL.\n\n                      Appeal from the Circuit Court for Wilson County\n                      No. 2020-CV-40 Michael Wayne Collins, Judge\n                          ____","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[7798317],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"The plaintiff was injured when his car was hit by an uninsured driver. The plaintiff was initially paid $5,000.00 from the medical payments coverage of his automobile policy. A jury then found the plaintiff's compensatory damages to total $80,000.00. The plaintiff's uninsured motorist carrier then paid the plaintiff $45,000.00, representing the policy limit of $50,000.00 less the prior $5,000.00 payment. The plaintiff then sought to compel the uninsured motorist carrier to pay the additional $5,000.00 owed under the uninsured motorist policy. The trial court agreed and ordered the uninsured motorist carrier to pay the plaintiff an additional $5,000.00, resulting in total payment by the carrier to the plaintiff of $55,000.00. The uninsured motorist carrier appeals. We reverse the decision of the trial court."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4883753/state-ex-rel-duncan-v-am-transm-sys-inc/","attorney":"","caseName":"State ex rel. Duncan v. Am. Transm. Sys., Inc.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2021 Ohio 1697"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":4883753,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2021-05-17","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2021-P-0005","docket_id":59911893,"judge":"Per Curiam","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T02:49:47.699272Z","date_created":"2021-05-17T17:14:38.597496Z","score":{"bm25":40.311954}},"neutralCite":"2021 Ohio 1697","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2690943,3188499],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2021/2021-Ohio-1697.pdf","id":4687532,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2021/05/17/state_ex_rel._duncan_v._am._transm._sys._inc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-22T20:00:34.223727Z","date_created":"2021-05-17T17:14:38.602155Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"d1292bc1de28991aafa7e46da1c3e6c5af7d72b1","snippet":"[Cite as State ex rel. Duncan v. Am. Transm. Sys., Inc., 2021-Ohio-1697.]\n\n                                     IN THE COURT OF APPEALS\n\n                                 ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n                                       PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO\n\n\n [STATE OF OHIO ex rel.]                                  :           PER CURIAM OPINION\n RICHARD DUNCAN,\n                                                          :\n                  Relator,                                            CAS","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4687532],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"EXTRAORDINARY WRITS - mandamus declaratory judgment injunction appellate court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over claims for public and private nuisances and prayer for injunctive relief and compensatory damages failure to caption a petition for a writ of mandamus is waivable error consequential damages are generally noncompensable as damnum absque injuria (i.e., damage without injury) dismissed."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4777472/kinzel-v-ebner/","attorney":"","caseName":"Kinzel v. Ebner","caseNameFull":"","citation":["157 N.E.3d 898","2020 Ohio 4165"],"citeCount":9,"cluster_id":4777472,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2020-08-21","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"E-19-033, E-19-034","docket_id":17467697,"judge":"Mayle","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:13:05.293557Z","date_created":"2020-08-21T18:10:12.192281Z","score":{"bm25":39.36591}},"neutralCite":"2020 Ohio 4165","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[108598,111719,3695837,3702886,3706643,3707491,3720843,3732751,3751503,3756931,3759121,3760505,3769092,3776708],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/6/2020/2020-Ohio-4165.pdf","id":4557819,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2020/08/21/kinzel_v._ebner.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:13:05.382037Z","date_created":"2020-08-21T18:10:12.209734Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"6f34937db2582beff955ef5452d9071efc7786f2","snippet":"[Cite as Kinzel v. Ebner, 2020-Ohio-4165.]\n\n\n\n\n                            IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                                SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                      ERIE COUNTY\n\n\nJudith A. Kinzel, Trustee                            Court of Appeals Nos. E-19-033\n                                                                           E-19-034\n        Appellee/Cross-Appellant\n                                                     Trial Court No. 2017 CV 0554\nv","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4557819],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Jurisdictional priority rule did not apply to bar court from considering appellant's claims that ordinances were invalid and unconstitutional, but trial court judgment was not yet final with respect to validity and constitutionality of ordinances because claims were inextricably intertwined with claims still pending in trial court. Claim for permanent injunction was not yet final because compensatory damages were unresolved. Deed restrictions did not prohibit use of properties for short-term rentals."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4427532/catalanotto-v-byrd/","attorney":"\n  J. REID YODER and BENJAMIN R. SORBER, Attorneys at Law, Akron, for Appellants.\n , \n  PAUL F. ADAMSON, Attorney at Law, Akron, for Appellee.\n ","caseName":"Catalanotto v. Byrd","caseNameFull":"John CATALANOTTO, Et Al., Appellants v. Phyllis BYRD, Et Al., Appellee","citation":["2017 Ohio 7688","97 N.E.3d 1016"],"citeCount":104,"cluster_id":4427532,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2017-09-20","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"28426","docket_id":6155412,"judge":"Callahan","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T00:42:20.037159Z","date_created":"2017-09-20T16:15:16.598692Z","score":{"bm25":39.363117}},"neutralCite":"2017 Ohio 7688","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2691956,2705475,2705791,2774023,3200355,4161891],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/9/2017/2017-Ohio-7688.pdf","id":4204785,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2017/09/20/catalanotto_v._byrd.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T15:10:07.654754Z","date_created":"2017-09-20T16:15:16.608601Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"48eff1995bd746f30e89b3f9baaab308c7cc77a3","snippet":"\n\n\n  CALLAHAN, Judge.\n \n\n  {¶ 1} Appellants, John and Rita Catalanotto (\"the Catalanottos\"), appeal the judgment entered in favor of Appellee, Phyllis Byrd, in the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. For the reasons set forth below, this Court reverses and remands.\n \n\n  I.\n \n\n  {¶ 2} This case arises from a long-standing feud between neighbors. This is the fourt","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4204785],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"motion for new trial - contrary to law - Civ.R. 59(A)(7) - compensatory damages - punitive damages - malice - bad faith - attorney fees - assault - trespass"}]}