# C C Realty v. North Olmsted Bd., 88162 (5-10-2007)

> Ohio Court of Appeals · May 10, 2007 · 2007 Ohio 2224

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3731066

## Case

- **Full name:** C C Realty v. North Olmsted Bd. of Zoning Appeals
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** May 10, 2007
- **Citations:** 2007 Ohio 2224
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent
- **Judges:** PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, J.:<page_number>Page 3</page_number>
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3731066

## Opinion text

{¶ 32} I respectfully dissent from the majority's opinion and would instead follow the limited holding the Ohio Supreme Court put forth in Negin v. Board of Bldg. Zoning Appeals (1982), 69 Ohio St.2d 492 , 496 , which states that if the only use of a parcel of land is to sell it to an adjacent landowner, that parcel is rendered useless for any practical purpose and becomes a confiscation or unconstitutional government taking. By denying Halleen's variance request, the BZA has ensured that Halleen will be deprived of any viable use of the parcel, yet Halleen continues to pay commercial taxes on the property. As such, I would reverse and remand this case to the BZA for a just compensation determination.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3731066. Public record. Not legal advice.