Ohio Bar Examination (UBE)

# Ohio Bar Examination (UBE) Study Notes
## GROUNDED - generated from real us_cases (US corpus). Citations are real DB records; holdings extracted from opinions.

---

## CIVIL PROCEDURE

### Judgment and Remedies

**Doctrine:** Future medical damages awarded in tort cases may require specific treatment regarding placement into dedicated medical care funds. However, substantial changes to judgment awards that were not raised on direct appeal may be denied.

**Holding:** Where a defendant seeks to reform a judgment post-trial to place future medical expenses into a Future Medical Care Fund, but this issue was not raised during direct appeal, the trial court's denial of such reform motion is affirmed. The modification would constitute a substantial change to the judgment requiring appeal-stage consideration.

**Case:** *Scott v. Roberts*, 889 So. 2d 446 (La. Ct. App. 2004)

---

## CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

### Due Process - Detention and Liberty Interests

**Doctrine:** Due process requires specific statutory and procedural safeguards be followed in cases involving the detention of minors or persons subject to state authority, particularly in family law and juvenile justice contexts.

**Holding:** Where a secure detention order for a dependent child fails to show that the minor was afforded due process requirements mandated by statute and court rules (including proper notice and hearing requirements), the child is entitled to relief via writ of habeas corpus, even if the detention authority believed it was acting correctly.

**Case:** *W.C. v. Smith*, 898 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

**Sub-principle - Due Process in Administrative Discipline:** Due process requires that in disciplinary proceedings, constitutional protections (such as notice and opportunity to be heard) cannot be waived unilaterally; the respondent must be afforded procedural fairness.

**Case:** *Davis v. New Orleans Police Department*, 899 So. 2d 37 (La. Ct. App. 2005)

---

## CONTRACTS

### Formation and Interpretation

**Doctrine:** Contract formation requires clear manifestation of mutual intent by the parties. Tariff classification disputes hinge on the proper categorization and description of goods according to statutory provisions, which is essentially a contract-interpretation problem in the context of commercial tariffs.

**Holding:** Imported merchandise must be classified according to its true commercial purpose and characteristics. Where brass switchplates were classified as electrical wiring devices (17.5% duty) rather than household brass articles (11% duty), the tariff classification determination depends on the actual functional nature of the goods.

**Case:** *New York Merchandise Co. v. United States*, 59 Cust. Ct. 306 (1967)

**Sub-principle - Essential Terms and Acceptance:** An instrument reciting receipt of deposit rent with specification of monthly rent and term does not constitute a binding lease if (1) the delivering agent lacked authority to execute leases, and (2) the parties contemplated a formal lease to follow.

**Case:** *Finkelstein v. Fabyik*, 107 N.Y.S. 67 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Term 1907)

---

## CRIMINAL LAW

### Guilty Pleas and Sentencing

**Doctrine:** In sentencing proceedings, statements made by prosecutors to the jury must be properly grounded in evidence presented at trial. Inflammatory or speculative arguments are improper.

**Holding:** Where a prosecutor argues to the jury that a rape victim will someday bear children that are "idiots and deformed imbeciles" as a result of trauma, such argument is improper when it does not follow from evidence in the case and constitutes inflammatory speculation not supported by medical or scientific testimony.

**Case:** *Summers v. State*, 182 S.W.2d 720 (Tex. Crim. App. 1944)

---

## EVIDENCE

### Hearsay and Exceptions

**Doctrine:** Hearsay is generally inadmissible to prove the truth of the matter asserted, but limited exceptions exist for certain categories of statements (e.g., family history, pedigree, admissions against interest).

**Holding:** A record of a recovery of freedom by a deceased ancestor may be admitted to support a present petitioner's title to freedom, and the depositions of witnesses contained within that prior record may be read as hearsay to prove pedigree (family history exception to hearsay rule).

**Case:** *Davis v. Forrest*, 2 D.C. 23 (U.S. Cir. Ct. D.C. 1811)

**Sub-principle - Limit of Family History Exception:** Depositions taken in a separate suit for freedom by a member of the same family cannot be read as hearsay merely to establish the condition of a common ancestor; the family history exception has limits.

**Case:** *Negro Humphries v. Tench*, 2 D.C. 337 (U.S. Cir. Ct. D.C. 1822)

**Sub-principle - Best Evidence and Affidavits:** An answer "upon information and belief" is merely hearsay and has no probative force to contradict testimony of witnesses. Nor can an ex parte affidavit of a deceased witness from another proceeding be admitted in place of live testimony without waiving the best evidence rule.

**Case:** *August Miller v. District of Columbia*, 16 D.C. 291 (D.C. Sup. Ct. 1886)

---

## REAL PROPERTY

### Landlord & Tenant - Remedies and Deposits

**Doctrine:** In landlord-tenant disputes, deposits held by the landlord are considered security for performance of lease covenants. Such deposits survive summary dispossession proceedings and may be applied to deficiencies in rent or breach of lease obligations.

**Holding:** A tenant deposit held as security for rent and performance of covenants remains available to the landlord even after a dispossession warrant is issued and the tenant is evicted. The landlord may apply the deposit to any deficiency in rent owed or costs incurred due to the tenant's breach.

**Case:** *Colderaro v. Kempner*, 107 N.Y.S. 41 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Term 1907)

**Sub-principle - Lease Requirements:** An instrument purporting to evidence a lease for a term exceeding one year must be in writing and executed by a person with actual (not apparent) authority to bind the owner. A receipt for deposit rent, even if referencing rent amount and term, is not a binding lease if the agent lacked written authority.

**Case:** *Finkelstein v. Fabyik*, 107 N.Y.S. 67 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Term 1907)

---

## TORTS

### Negligence - Employer Liability and Assumption of Risk

**Doctrine:** An employer (master) owes a duty to provide safe working conditions and proper machinery. However, an employee who has knowledge of a hazard and has worked in the environment may assume the risk arising from that hazard.

**Holding:** Where an employee knew the location of a boiler in the workplace and had worked in the shop for two years, the employee is deemed to have assumed the risk of injury arising from the boiler's position and the peculiar construction of the building housing it. The employer is not liable absent a breach of duty to warn or to maintain safe equipment despite the employee's assumed knowledge.

**Case:** *Ware v. Ithaca Street Railway Co.*, 109 N.Y.S. 426 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. 1908)

**Sub-principle - Pleading and Proof:** The complaint in a negligence action must specify the alleged defect or hazard. A complaint alleging failure to guard machinery will not support a judgment based on unpleaded dangers (such as electric currents or air drafts) unless the evidence clearly establishes negligence regarding those specific hazards.

**Case:** *Scott v. International Paper Co.*, 109 N.Y.S. 423 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. 1908)

**Sub-principle - Damages:** In tort actions for personal injury, recovery of damages is not excessive if reasonably proportionate to the injury; damages need not be nominal to be reasonable.

**Case:** *Raynolds v. Vinier*, 109 N.Y.S. 293 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. 1908)

---

## SUMMARY OF REAL CASES CITED

1. *Scott v. Roberts*, 889 So. 2d 446 (La. Ct. App. 2004) – Civil Procedure: Judgment reform
2. *W.C. v. Smith*, 898 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005) – Constitutional Law: Due process in detention
3. *Davis v. New Orleans Police Department*, 899 So. 2d 37 (La. Ct. App. 2005) – Constitutional Law: Disciplinary due process
4. *New York Merchandise Co. v. United States*, 59 Cust. Ct. 306 (1967) – Contracts: Tariff classification
5. *Finkelstein v. Fabyik*, 107 N.Y.S. 67 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Term 1907) – Contracts & Property: Lease formation
6. *Summers v. State*, 182 S.W.2d 720 (Tex. Crim. App. 1944) – Criminal Law: Sentencing argument limits
7. *Davis v. Forrest*, 2 D.C. 23 (U.S. Cir. Ct. D.C. 1811) – Evidence: Hearsay exception for family history
8. *Negro Humphries v. Tench*, 2 D.C. 337 (U.S. Cir. Ct. D.C. 1822) – Evidence: Limitation on family history exception
9. *Colderaro v. Kempner*, 107 N.Y.S. 41 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Term 1907) – Property: Landlord deposits
10. *Ware v. Ithaca Street Railway Co.*, 109 N.Y.S. 426 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. 1908) – Torts: Assumption of risk

---

*All citations are bluebook-style citations from actual US case law database records. Holdings are extracted directly from opinion_text fields as of 2026-06-24.*