Opinion

Walker v. Serrott

  • 14 Ohio St. 2d 54
  • 43 Ohio Op. 2d 118
  • 236 N.E.2d 670
  • 1968 Ohio LEXIS 418
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Apr 17, 1968
Status
Published
On the bench
Brown, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Taft, Zimmerman
Cited by
3 cases
Authority
More cited than 86.1%

The opinion

Per Curiam.

We find that the adoption by the city council of Ordinance No. 245-66 rendered this case moot. See Miner v. Witt, 82 Ohio St. 237 , and Webster v. Serrott, 7 Ohio App. 2d 67 . At the time this annexation ordinance was adopted there was no injunction, temporary or otherwise, in effect to prevent such annexation. The automatic temporary injunction provided in Section 709.07, Revised Code, was terminated when the Court of Common Pleas dismissed the petition, and Walker did not obtain a temporary injunction from the Court of Appeals, which would have been the proper way to prevent this cause from becoming moot. Croll v. Franklin, 36 Ohio St. 316 ; Section 2727.05, Revised Code.

Judgment reversed.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, 0’Neill, Herbert and Brown, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.