# Saunders v. Clark County Zoning Department

> Ohio Supreme Court · May 27, 1981 · 66 Ohio St. 2d 259

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6757212

## Case

- **Full name:** Saunders v. Clark County Zoning Department
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 27, 1981
- **Citations:** 66 Ohio St. 2d 259; 20 Ohio Op. 3d 244; 421 N.E.2d 152; 1981 Ohio LEXIS 506
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Holmes
- **Judges:** Brown, Celebrezze, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 78 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/6757212

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a foster home for delinquent juveniles constituted a single housekeeping unit for the purposes of the Clark County Zoning Resolution where the applicants were the licensed foster parents of the juveniles and all parties lived together in the applicants’ residence

## Opinion text

Holmes, J.,
dissenting. Principles of law as pronounced by the highest court of the state should remain the case law of the state unless sound reason, or changing patterns and needs of the times, dictate a modification in order to best serve the public. Although I am in agreement with this basic premise of stare decisis, I also accept the principle that our common law should be flexible to meet our current public and professional needs. But the flexibility effected by this decision, which, in effect, overrules syllabus law as pronounced by this court only nine months ago, in Garcia v. Siffrin (1980), 63 Ohio St. 2d 259 , transforms the law of stare decisis into that which assumes a stability not unlike a revolving door. It would seem that the law of this state will now be governed by what might be the personnel of the court, or the panel hearing and writing upon a case, or both, at any given point in time.
Locher, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6757212. Public record. Not legal advice.