# City of Cleveland v. Trzebuckowski

> Ohio Supreme Court · June 2, 1999 · 85 Ohio St. 3d 524

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6779428

## Case

- **Full name:** City of Cleveland v. Trzebuckowski
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 2, 1999
- **Citations:** 85 Ohio St. 3d 524; 709 N.E.2d 1148
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Cook
- **Judges:** Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 95 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/6779428

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that just because a city ordinance forbids juveniles from being present in a billiard hall, the law does not violate the right of freedom of association because it does not preclude the creation and cultivation of an intimate relationship with a juvenile
- explaining that, for non-protected classifications, and cases that do not involve fundamental rights, the appropriate level of scrutiny is rational-basis review the most deferential standard of review
- stating that an order is final and appealable under R.C. 2505.02 if it (1) affects a substantial right, (2) in effect determines the action, and (3) prevents a judgment
- stating that a judgment would become a final appealable order on the date of journalization

## Opinion text

Cook, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part. I agree with Sections I and 11(A) of the majority opinion. I dissent from the conclusion that the city’s method of enforcement violates equal protection. On this issue, I agree with the analysis of the court of appeals. I would find that, under the rational-basis test, Trzebuckowski has failed to demonstrate that the city’s method of enforcing this ordinance bears no rational relation to the legitimate governmental interest in promoting the welfare of minors.
Moyer, C.J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6779428. Public record. Not legal advice.