Archive for category: Uncategorized

In this episode of Legally Speaking on WFMJ Today, BK Shareholder, SuperLawyer, and respected criminal defense attorney Frank Cassese provides perspective on the South Carolina Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the conviction of Alex Murdaugh, the prominent personal injury lawyer found guilty of murdering his wife Maggie and son Paul at their home in 2021.

Murdaugh’s 2023 trial garnered worldwide media attention rivaling the O.J. Simpson case. After being found guilty by a jury, Murdaugh was sentenced to two consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole.
But, in a shocking turn of events, South Carolina’ high court, citing jury tampering and misconduct by the court clerk during the original trial, overturned the verdict and ordered that Murdaugh be retried.

According to Attorney Cassese, allegations of jury tampering by the clerk of courts assigned to the case arose during the trial. The Supreme Court found the clerk had improperly attempted to influence the jury during the proceedings. That finding led to the reversal of the Murdaugh’s conviction.

Attorney Cassese explained that jury tampering is the number one “no-no” in criminal and civil cases.

“Jury deliberations are very sacred,” Atty. Cassese said. “So it is an egregious violation to tamper with that process.”

Frank noted that even though his murder conviction has been overturned, Murdaugh has been sentenced to 40 years in prison for financial crimes he committed during his legal career. So even though the Supreme Court has ordered a new trial, Murdaugh won’t be getting out of prison any time soon. “That means he could go back to court, be acquitted of the murder charges and still remain in prison for the rest of his life.”

“As a trial lawyer, someone attempting to improperly influence a jury is one of the biggest concerns you can ever have,” Atty. Cassese continued.

“There were allegations that the court clerk in question had a stake in the outcome of the trial because she had negotiated a deal to write a book about the crime and the trial. That’s what led to the reversal,” he said.

Frank then discussed juries and undue influence in general. “People don’t realize that when they see news and sees snippets of stories about cases they’re not getting the whole picture of the matter being tried.”

“On the other hand, a jury sees all the evidence, and it is the state’s responsibility—whether it is the state of Ohio or the state of South Carolina—to use that evidence to prove the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” he said.

“So sometimes when people are acquitted, it doesn’t necessarily mean a jury thinks they’re innocent. It means that the prosecutors didn’t prove their case,” Atty. Cassese noted.

“And here is a critically important point: the jury is only permitted to consider the evidence that is presented to them. They can’t or watch stories in the media and they can’t Google search for information,” he continued.

“Why?  Because information from outside the proceedings can be illegitimate or inaccurate. That is why judges often give jurors strict orders not to speak to others about the case, not to look up info on their phone, or read about the case on social media.”

Frank also took note of the fact that the Attorney General of South Carolina said the case would be retried as quickly as possible and emphasized that no one was above the law.

“He made those statements because he wanted to assure the public that although Murdaugh was once a prominent and powerful figure in the state he won’t receive special treatment. He wants people to know justice will be served,” Atty. Cassese concluded.

After Ursuline High School cancelled the 2025 football season in the midst of allegations that some players had engaged in hazing, sexual misconduct, physical abuse, and harassment during an out of state team trip, a number of student athletes who were not involved in the incidents explored the possibility of transferring to and playing for other schools this year. On September 16, 2025, the Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA), the body that governs interscholastic athletics in the state, ruled they could not.

In a lawsuit filed on behalf of six of the players on September 22, 2025, Attorneys Brian Kopp and Frank Cassese of BetrasKopp LLC asked the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court to issue a Temporary Restraining Order as well as temporary and permanent injunctions that will prevent the OHSAA, its Executive Director DougUte, and/or his agents from enforcing that ruling.

“These student athletes have done nothing wrong,” Attorney Kopp said. “Through no fault of their own they’ve been robbed of the opportunity to play for Ursuline, and, in the case of seniors, to ever play high school football again. If a parent believes it is best to transfer their child out of Ursuline High School so they can continue their athletic careers they should have the right to do so. This lawsuit was filed to guarantee that right will not be restricted by the OHSAA’s arbitrary and unjust decisions.”

“The OHSAA is sending a troubling message to high school student-athletes and parents across Ohio: ‘Blow the whistle and get benched,’” Attorney Cassese commented. “Student athletes who observe the type of behavior that allegedly occurred at Ursuline are going to think twice about reporting it if the OHSAA insists on punishing the innocent right along with the guilty. Mr. Ute and his staff should have done their due diligence and allowed those who were not involved in the incident to transfer to another school and move on with their lives. Instead, the clear directive moving forward is remain silent or risk losing everything.”

In the lawsuit the plaintiffs assert that the rules and by-laws the OHSAA cited in denying students the right to transfer are neither pertinent nor applicable to Ursuline’s situation.  because they are intended to “prevent student athletes from ‘shopping around’ for a school to attend based solely on which school will best showcase the student’s athletic talents, which, in turn, would promote an atmosphere of athletic recruiting at the high school level.”

“Our clients aren’t ‘shopping around’ for a better school because they want to, they’re seeking permission to transfer because the Diocese of Youngstown and Ursuline’s administration failed to deal with allegations of misconduct in early June,” Attorney Kopp said. “Now, as a result of the OHSAA’s ruling, these students are trapped in an institution plagued by civil and criminal action and a football program shrouded in uncertainty. Fortunately, the Court has the power to set them free by issuing the TRO and injunctions we are seeking.”

In the suit the plaintiffs note they will suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted:

Plaintiffs do not have monetary damages. They are being prevented from participating in interscholastic athletics because of the actions of other individuals. The fleeting nature of high school sports means that Plaintiffs can never recoup the missed contests that are played while this unjustified penalty from the OHSAA remains enforced. Plaintiffs have and will continue to suffer irreparable harm through the OHSAA’s decisions, for which there is no adequate remedy at law. A temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunction enjoying Defendants from enforcing the OHSAA’s decision is the only available remedy.

For more information please contact Frank Cassese at 330-746-8484.  The Verified Complaint may be viewed and downloaded here.  The Motion for TRO  may be viewed and downloaded here.

If there is one thing I’ve learned during my three decades as an attorney, it’s that laws don’t always make sense. As an example, I offer into evidence, the Ohio statute that governed the purchase and use of consumer-grade fireworks by private citizens from 2008 until 2022. During that time, you or I could walk into a licensed fireworks dealer on July 4, buy a carload of what are known as 1.4G fireworks, and then swear we were going to transport our arsenal out of state within 48 hours because it was illegal to discharge them within the state.

This law was ridiculous for two reasons: first, it forced Ohioans who wanted to celebrate Independence Day by firing off some fireworks in their backyard to lie and commit a crime which was more than a little ironic and absolutely un-American, and, second, it was, for all intents and purposes, unenforceable, a fact underscored by the billions of dollars in consumer pyrotechnics that lit up Ohio’s night skies and scared Ohio’s dogs each and every Fourth—prohibition or no prohibition.

After numerous attempts to erase the law and government-mandated ruse from the books, the fine folks who inhabit the Ohio House and Senate passed HB 172 by overwhelming margins on November 4, 2021. One provision of the bill which became effective on July 1, 2022 eliminated the requirement that Ohioans hightail it out of the state to demonstrate their patriotism. As a result, we are now free to shoot off roman candles, skyrockets, sparking wheels, seven-shot Beastlys, and 10-ten shot Cherry Bombers from the comfort of our homes.

In addition to permitting the use of consumer fireworks within Ohio’s borders, HB 172 also established regulations for doing so—you know rules we didn’t need when we were buying 36-shot China Dragons here and shooting them off in, I guess Pennsylvania or West Virginia. Because the law is relatively new, and the Fourth of July is rapidly approaching I thought it would be beneficial to review the rules:

Let’s start with when we can fire away:

From 4 PM to 11 PM on:

• From 4 PM to 11 PM on July 3, 4, and 5, and the Friday, Saturday and Sunday immediately before and after the 4^th.
• From 4 PM to 11 PM on Memorial and Labor Day weekends
• From 4 PM to 11:59 PM on New Year’s Eve and 12 AM to 1:00 AM and 4 PM to 11 PM New Year’s Day
• From 4 PM to 11 PM on Chinese New Year
• From 4 PM to 11 PM on Cinco de Mayo
• From 4 PM to 11 PM on Diwali, the Hindu Festival of Lights which falls on November 12 this year.
• From 4 PM to 11 PM on Juneteenth.

Next let’s talk about where.  You can light up the night from your own property or another person’s if the owner has given you express permission. Oh, and you can’t fire them off indoors, so no shooting Roman Candles at your siblings or friends if you’re in the kitchen or living room. You also may not discharge fireworks within 150 feet of property housing livestock unless the owner of the property is given five days’ notice. I guess that will give the livestock owner time to sedate the animals. 

Who is important. No one under the age of 18 and no person under the influence of any intoxicating liquor, beer, or controlled substance may discharge fireworks.

Finally, let’s not forget that fireworks can be dangerous if they are mishandled or used carelessly. According to a report issued by the Consumer Product Safety Commission 11,500 fireworks-related injuries were treated in U.S. hospitals in 2021. Not surprisingly, the vast majority of the injuries occurred between June 18 and July 18. To make sure your holiday isn’t marred by an accident, please follow these safety tips as you celebrate America’s 257^th birthday:

• Never allow young children to handle fireworks.
• Anyone using fireworks or standing nearby should wear protective eyewear.
• Never hold lit fireworks in your hands.
• Only use fireworks away from people, houses, and flammable material.
• Do not try to re-light or handle malfunctioning fireworks.
• Soak both spent and unused fireworks in water for a few hours before discarding.
• Keep water or a fire extinguisher nearby to fully douse fireworks that don’t discharge or in case of fire.

Thanks for taking the time to check out this week’s blog and Happy Fourth to you all.

Avery Russell, 11, of Columbus is rebuilding her life after a traumatic attack by two pit bulls on June 11, 2024. Surgeons at Nationwide Children’s Hospital performed a nine hour emergency surgery just after the attack. Photo by Barbara J. Perenis of the Columbus Dispatch.

As we noted when we reprinted the USA Today Ohio News Network series “VICIOUS: An investigation into how Ohio laws fail thousands of dog attack victims,” the laws related to dog bites and attacks and are woefully inadequate and put us all at risk of suffering the types of debilitating, disfiguring injuries sustained by 11-year-old Avery Russel who was attacked by two pit bulls.  During the attack the dogs chewed off most of Avery’s ears, ripped into her nose, left a huge gouge above her left eye and punctured her forehead and shoulder. Her face, one doctor said, looked like ground hamburger.

Despite all the damage, the dogs’ owners face only misdemeanor charges.

Fortunately, some member of the Ohio General Assembly are taking action. According to the following report from the Gongwer Statehouse News Service, three bills designed to strengthen Ohio’s dog attack laws have just been introduced in the Ohio House. One, HB 240 which is sponsored by Rep. Meredith Lawson-Rowe (D-Reynoldsburg), is named “Avery’s Law.”  In addition to the three bills already in the hopper, State Rep. Phil Plummer of Dayton plans to introduce a fourth in the near future.

We’ll provide updates as the legislation makes its way through the Gneral Assembly and, when the time comes, we’ll ask our readers to contact our state reps and senators and urge them to support the bills. We want to commend the sponsors of the legislation for taking positive steps to protect our families–especially our children–and hold irresponsible owners accountable for their actions. Here’s the Gongwer report:

Dangerous dogs were a topic of discussion for a House panel Tuesday.

The House Public Safety Committee Track fielded testimony on three bills addressing the issue.

One measure redefines what constitutes a nuisance, dangerous and vicious dog (HB 247 Track).

Sponsoring Rep. Kevin Miller (R-Newark) said the need for the bill was brought to his attention by the dog warden of Licking County.

He explained that the changes in law in his bill pertain only to unprovoked attacks.

“Dogs that act in defense of themselves, their owners, or their property are explicitly protected under this bill. The intent is not to punish responsible owners or protective dogs,” he said. “Conversely this legislation aims to address cases of negligence where irresponsible owners of dangerous and vicious dogs fail to keep their animals from harming the public.”

Miller told the panel the bill provides the local dog warden the power to seize a dog immediately following an attack in which a victim is killed or seriously injured.

He said it will also hold irresponsible dog owners accountable when they fail to control dogs already designated as dangerous or vicious.

“Penalties for these individuals have been increased to better reflect the seriousness of their negligence,” he said. “Basically, these individuals have previously been put on notice they possess an extremely malicious animal but continue to fail to ensure the safety of the public. This is simply not acceptable. In the most severe cases of a serious injury or death, the penalty will raise from a felony of the fourth to a third-degree felony.”

After Rep. Haraz Ghanbari (R-Perrysburg) revealed that he was attacked by two German Shepherds last year while campaigning, Rep. Juantia Brent (D-Cleveland) questioned whether the bill would cover his situation since he was on someone else’s property.

Miller said it would require a probable cause hearing to determine whether the attack was unprovoked.

The other bills are sponsored by Rep. Cecil Thomas (D-Cincinnati) and Rep. Meredith Lawson-Rowe (D-Reynoldsburg).

One (HB 240 Track) was inspired by a 2024 dog attack in Reynoldsburg that left a 12-year-old severely injured.

Lawson-Rowe told the panel the two pit bulls had attacked before, but their owner failed to report the previous incident.

Among the changes in the bill, it would require an owner to report an attack within 24 hours.

“Cities across the state have created ordinances regulating dogs and increasing penalties for owners of dogs who attack or even kill humans and other animals. It’s time that we as a state do the same,” she said. “Again, it is our hope that we can use House Bill 240, Avery’s Law, to strengthen our dog laws statewide and to give families who go through these tragic incidents, adequate legal recourse.”

Thomas said the bill will help to ensure that repeat-offender dogs and negligent owners can no longer slip through the legal cracks.

“Importantly, this legislation does not target any one breed. It targets behavior – and the responsibility of those who own dogs,” he said. “Responsible dog owners who properly train, contain, and care for their pets will have nothing to fear under this bill. But those who neglect or conceal their dog’s violent history must be held to account – because the cost of doing nothing is simply too high.”

Their other piece of legislation requires a dog to be held for a 10-day quarantine period following an attack in which the dog injures, seriously injures or kills a person and mandates a court hearing to determine the animal’s disposition (HB 241 Track).

Thomas said that after a recent dog attack in his district, the animal was allowed to remain in its home under current state law.

“Ten days later, nothing had changed,” he said. “The owners were under no legal obligation to surrender the dogs. The victims, meanwhile, were left to live in fear.”

Lawson-Rowe echoed that sentiment.

“Victims and families of victims should not have to worry about a dog who has attacked already being left at home to possibly attack again,” she said. “This bill would close this loophole and would create due process for all parties involved.”

Rep. Thomas Hall (R-Middletown) asked why there are three separate bills addressing the same issue.

“We are all attempting to accomplish the same effort here,” Thomas responded.

Rep. Phil Plummer (R-Dayton) noted he is working on a fourth, more expansive bill that would touch on other areas of animal care.