Hill v. Hikel

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 2161

Syllabus

SUMMARY JUDGMENT – FALSE ARREST – INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTION DISTRESS – MALICIOUS PROSECUTION – CIV.R. 30 – CIV.R. 12(B)(6) – JUDICIAL BIAS: The trial court's comments as to its previous dealings with plaintiff in unrelated criminal matters did not rise to the level of judicial bias. The trial court did not err in dismissing plaintiff's state false arrest claim or his malicious prosecution claims, as he filed this civil action beyond the one-year statute of limitations for false arrest, and he did not allege that defendants acted under \color of state law\ in order to properly plead a malicious prosecution claim. The trial court did not err when it denied plaintiff's motion to strike his deposition that was taken while he was incarcerated because the record shows that he had notice of defendants' intent to take his deposition, and the record fails to show that he ever requested an attorney. The trial court did not err in granting defendants summary judgment prior to considering plaintiff's motion to reconsider, because the record shows that the trial court entered a judgment on the motion to reconsider prior to entering a judgment on the motion for summary judgment. The trial court did not err in granting defendants summary judgment, because plaintiff did not show any disputes as to material facts via any evidence the trial court could consider, and the evidence that plaintiff did provide was merely speculative.