Rieger v. Rieger
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Wolff, Judge.
{¶ 1} Joseph Rieger appeals pro se from the overruling of his motion to seal the record of a consented-to civil protection order (“CPO”)- Rieger appeared pro se for an evidentiary hearing before a magistrate. The magistrate overruled the motion. After Rieger filed objections, the trial court found the objections to be without merit and adopted the magistrate’s decision and permanent order. Cathy Rieger did not appear in the trial court and has not appeared here.
{¶ 2} Rieger’s pro se brief contains thirteen assignments of error, which we have rearranged and combined in order to…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Wisconsin v. ConstantineauSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- City of Pepper Pike v. DoeOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- Chase v. KingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Rieger v. Rieger, 21784 (5-11-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- In re D.L.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Luttrell v. YounceOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
- Rieger v. Montgomery County Clerk of Courts, 22575 (1-30-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
- State v. LevyOhio Court of Appeals · 2023
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.