Child Custody Practice and Procedure, 2013 Ed.

New features and recent developments in this 2013 edition include:

• New and updated cases and references in all chapters, including the Supreme Court's recent Hague Abduction Convention decision in Chafin v. Chafin (Section 3:6)
• Revised Section 3:28 discussing the registration of child custody orders under UCCJEA
• Fully updated Appendix 4A regarding child custody criteria in state statutes

Ohio Planning and Zoning Law 2013 Ed. (Baldwin's Ohio Handbook Series)

New features and recent developments in the 2013 edition include:

• Rumple Sanitary Landfill, Inc. v. Colerain Township, 134 Ohio St. 3d 93, 2012-Ohio-3914, 980 N.E. 2d 952 (2012), in which the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that a private sanitary landfill is not a public utility and, therefore, cannot be exempt from township zoning when there is "no public regulation or oversight of its rates and charges, no statutory requirement that all solid waste devivered to the landfill be accepted for disposal, and no right of the public to demand and receive its services, " See Section 6:33.
• Clifton v. Bannchester, 131 Ohio St. 3d 287, 2012-Ohio-780, 964 N.E. 2d 414 (2012), and Moore v. Middletown, 133 Ohio St. 3d 55, 2012-Ohio-3897, 975 N.E. 2d 977 (2012), two cases in which the Ohio Supreme Court addressed the standing of nonresident landowners to allege a taking of land or a violation of due process or equal protecytion. See section 14:6.

Ohio Trial Practice 2013 Ed. (Baldwin's Ohio Handbook Series)

New features and recent developments in this 2013 edition include:

• Does the attorney-client relationship end when the client hires a replacement lawyer and a lawyer to pursue a malpractice claim against the allegedly negligent lawyer, even thought the client fails to fire that lawyer? See Ruf v. Belfance, 2013-Ohio-160, 2013 WL 243992, para. 14 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. Summit County 2013), discussed in Section 1:8
• Should a defendant be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea after sentencing when the trial court had failed to tell him that he was subject to a mandatory sentence? See State v. Dunham, 2012-Ohio-2957, para. 17, 2012 WL 2479542, (Ohio Ct. App. 5th Dist. Richland County 2012), discussed in Section 4:24
• Does the attorney-client privilege extend to an attorney's communications with a corporate client's corporate parents or affiliates.? See MA Equip. Leasing I, L.L.C. v. Tilton, 2012-Ohio-4668, N.E. 2d 1072 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. Franklin County 2012), appeal not allowed, 2013-Ohio-553(Ohio 2013), discussed in Section 19:7

Ohio Arrest, Search and Seizure 2013 Ed. (Baldwin's Handbook Series)

Recent developments covered in the 2013 edition include:

• Is police use of a drug-sniffing dog on the porch of a house, to investigate an unverified tip that marijuana is being grown in the house a "search" for Fourth Amendment purposes?  See Florida v. Jardines, 2013 WL 1196577 (U.S. 2013), discussed in Section 1:14 of this book.
• Will an outstanding warrant save an illegal stop where, at the time of the stop, the officer was unaware of the warrant?  See State v. Gardner, 2012-Ohio-5683, 984 N.E.2d 1025 (2012), discussed in section 15:17.
• Is a questionable affidavit for a search warrant to search for child pornography on a computer sufficiently bolstered by cyber tips from Yahoo? See State v. Eal, 2012-Ohio-1373, 2012 WL 1078331 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. Franklin County 2012), appeal not allowed, 132 Ohio St. 3d 1515, 2012-Ohio-4021, 974 N.E.2d 113 (2012) discussed in Section 7:6.

Baldwin's Ohio Employment Practices Law

Recent developments in the 2013 edition include:

• Discussion of rulingsof the National Labor Relations Board as to whether widely observed employer practices impermissibly restrict concerted activity by employees in violation of federal law. See section 2:4.

• The decision of the Ohio Supreme Court in the case of Lawrence v. City of Youngstown, 133 Ohio St. 3d 174, 2012-Ohio-4247, 977 N.E. 2d 582 (2012), in which the court held that an employer had an affirmative responsibility to provide an employee notice of the employee's discharge within a reasonable time after the discharge occurred, to avoid impeding the discharged employee's 90-day notification oblications under the Ohio statute governing the time limit for an employee to provide written notice to an employer of a worker's compensation retaliation claim against the employer. See section 3:36.

Searches & Seizures, Arrests and Confessions, 2d

New features and recent developments in release #28 include:

• United States v. Skinner, where the Sixth Circuit held that a court determines whether a defendant's resasonable expectation of privacy has been violated by looking at what the defendant is disclosing to the public, and not what information is known to the police. (see section 2:21)
• United States v. Tapia, in which the Eighth Dicruit held that the United Parcel Service agent's decision to hold a package in the office and invite a detective to inspect it did not fall within Fourth Amendment protection. (see section 2:7)
• United States v. Cowan, where the Eight Circuit upheld a vehicle search when an officer used the alarm button on key fob-seized during the execution of search warrant on an apartment for evidence of drug trafficking -- to identify a parked car.  (see section 11:3)

Ohio Driving Under the Influence Law - 2012-2013 Ed.

New features and recent developments in this edition include:

• Discussion of State v. Dumas, 2012-Ohio-91, 2012 WL 112994 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. Cuyahoga Court 2012), in which an OVI conviction was upheld despite the defendant's plea of not guilty by reason of insanity due to dissociative identity disorder (formerly known as multiple personality disorder).  See section 1:31.
• An updated discussion of Ohio law relating to the expungement or sealing of OVI convictions, and the impact of a prior or subsequent OVI conviction on an application to have a recored of a non-OVI criminal record sealed.  See Section 16:31.
• A new section (9:74) containing a flow chart illustrating common grounds for suppression of evicdence on OVI cases.