Which Lawyers Win Before Your Judge?

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know Your Judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know The Lawyers

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know Your Court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Cuyahoga County

Court

Cuyahoga County

Ohio

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2025-03-10
Status ACTIVE
Type Contract Business
Docket 23 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Aic Education Partners
Defendant Dava (dayton Athletic And Vocational Academy)|Board Of Directors Of Dava (dayton Athletic And Vocational Academy)
Photo of Hon. PETER J CORRIGAN

Judge

Hon. PETER J CORRIGAN

Cuyahoga County (OH)

Ohio

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. EFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS, FILED 05/09/2025, IS GRANTED IN PART. PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION DOES NOT OPPOSE A REFERRAL TO ARBITRATION. THEREFORE, WITHIN CASE IS HEREBY STAYED PENDING ADJUDICATION BY ARBITRATION. CASE TO BE REACTIVATED BY MOTION. NOTICE ISSUED
  2. RIEF IN OPPOSITION FILED BY P1 AIC EDUCATION PARTNERS SAMUEL R. SMITH 0076242 PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS
  3. CHEDULE ATTORNEY NOTICE. NOTICE GENERATED FOR SMITH/SAMUEL/R. 05/09/2025 17:02:02
  4. CHEDULE ATTORNEY NOTICE. NOTICE GENERATED FOR BERGER/CHELSEA/L. 05/09/2025 17:02:02
  5. MC BY PHONE SET FOR 06/03/2025 AT 01:45 PM. PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO INITIATE CONFERENCE CALL AND CONTACT THE COURT'S STAFF ATTORNEY AT 216-443-8589 ONCE ALL COUNSEL ARE ON THE LINE. COUNSEL FOR ALL PARTIES ARE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE AND BE FAMILIAR WITH THE UNDERLYING FACTS OF THE CASE. PARTIES NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL SHALL LIKEWISE PARTICIPATE VIA PHONE. FAILURE OF ANY KIND OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PERSONS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROPERLY SCHEDULED PHONE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS INCLUDING DISMISSAL OF THE CASE AND/OR JUDGMENT BEING RENDERED.
  6. OTION FILED FOR DEFENDANT(S) DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY)(D1) and BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY)(D2) CHELSEA L. BERGER 0089669 DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS
  7. TIPULATION FILED BY DEFENDANT(S) DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY)(D1) and BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY)(D2) ATTORNEY CHELSEA L. BERGER 0089669 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
  8. SPS RECEIPT NO. 56339010 DELIVERED BY USPS 03/17/2025 BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY) PROCESSED BY COC 03/26/2025.
  9. SPS RECEIPT NO. 56339009 DELIVERED BY USPS 03/17/2025 DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY) PROCESSED BY COC 03/26/2025.
  10. UMS COMPLAINT(56339010) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY) 100 EAST WOODBURY DR. DAYTON, OH 45415
  11. UMS COMPLAINT(56339009) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: DAVA (DAYTON ATHLETIC AND VOCATIONAL ACADEMY) 100 EAST WOODBURY DR. DAYTON, OH 45415
  12. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  13. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  14. RIT FEE
  15. RIT FEE
  16. UDGE PETER J CORRIGAN ASSIGNED (RANDOM)
  17. EGAL RESEARCH
  18. EGAL NEWS
  19. EGAL AID
  20. OURT SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND
  21. OMPUTER FEE
  22. LERK'S FEE
  23. EPOSIT AMOUNT PAID SAMUEL R. SMITH

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more