Case law

State ex rel. Ohio Ass'n of Public School Employees v. Civil Service Commission

45 Ohio St. 2d 295 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1976

With respect to the classified service positions with the board of education, E. C. … Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. Corrigan v. Seminatore

66 Ohio St. 2d 459 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1981

Bd. of Commissioners v. Noyes (1878), 35 Ohio St. 201 ; Thomas v. State, ex rel. Gilbert (1907), 76 Ohio St. 341 ; and State, ex rel. Hunt, v. Fronzier (1907), 77 Ohio St. 7 . See, also, State, ex rel. Gillie, v. … Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes and C. Brown, JJ., concur. Whiteside, J., of the Tenth Appellate District, sitting for P. Brown, J.

Crestview of Ohio, Inc. v. Board of Tax Appeals

25 Ohio St. 2d 93 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1971

On July 25, 1969, the Board of Tax Appeals returned the applications to the appellant, noting that the board’s power to remit taxes was limited to only one year under the provisions of R. C. 5713.081. … The sole issue raised is whether the Board of Tax Appeals had jurisdiction to consider these applications. It did not. R.

State ex rel. Public Employees Retirement Board v. Baker

169 Ohio St. (N.S.) 499 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1959

Village of Waite Hill v. Board of Tax Appeals

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 473 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1961

The question presented is whether the Board of Tax Appeals has jurisdiction over such applications filed by the village after it has divested itself of legal title to the property. *474 This question must be answered in the … The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed. Decision affirmed. Zimmerman, acting C. J., Younger, Taet, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

Spyker v. Board of Education of Lima School District

73 Ohio St. (N.S.) 376 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1905

Cleveland & Mahoning Valley Railway Co. v. Board of Commissioners

82 Ohio St. (N.S.) 440 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 24, 1910

State ex rel. Whartenby v. County Board of Education

122 Ohio St. (N.S.) 463 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1930

Co. v. Mowatt, 35 Ohio St., 284 , it is well stated at page 287 of the opinion: “Where authority is conferred to perform an act which the public interest demands, may is generally regarded as imperative.” … Co. v.

State ex rel. Tracy v. State Board of Accountancy

129 Ohio St. (N.S.) 66 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 27, 1934

That the State Board of Accountancy is a board of the state there can be no doubt. It is expressly made so by Section 1370, General Code, which created such board in 1908. … Respondents maintain this section applies only to boards receiving state aid and that, as the State Board of Accountancy is not within that category, this statute cannot be invoked.

State ex rel. Public Utilities Commission v. Controlling Board

130 Ohio St. (N.S.) 127 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 10, 1935

If the transfers requested were made, that would be tantamount to the enactment of an appropriation by the Controlling Board. … The Controlling Board, of course, has no such power. The Legislature is powerless to confer on any administrative board authority that would result in thwarting or circumventing the veto power of the Governor.

State ex rel. Witsamen v. Maumee Valley Guidance Center, Inc.

6 Ohio St. 3d 26 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1983

Henderson, v. Civil Service Comm. (1980), 63 Ohio St. 2d 39, 41 [ 17 O.O.3d 24 ]; State, ex rel. Stough, v. Bd. of Edn., supra; State, ex rel. Bingham, v. Riley (1966), 6 Ohio St. 2d 263, 264 [ 35 O.O.2d 424 ]. … Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. Hinkle v. Franklin County Board of Elections

47 Ohio St. 3d 117 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1989

Bargahiser, v. Bd. of Elections (1968), 14 Ohio St. 2d 129 , 43 O.O. 2d 238, 237 N.E. 2d 133 , writs of mandamus were denied under similar circumstances due to laches. … Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. Fishman v. Lucas County Board of Elections

116 Ohio St. 3d 19 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 22, 2007

Squire v. … Manos v. Delaware Cty.

O'Farrell v. Landis

135 Ohio St. 3d 190 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 25, 2013

[Cite as O’Farrell v. Landis, 135 Ohio St.3d 190, 2013-Ohio-197.] O’FARRELL v. LANDIS ET AL. [Cite as O’Farrell v. Landis, 135 Ohio St.3d 190, 2013-Ohio-197.] … Ryan Styer, Tuscarawas County Prosecuting Attorney; and Crabbe, Brown & James, L.L.P., and Andy Douglas, Special Counsel, for respondent Tuscarawas County Board of Elections.

State Ex Rel. Ford v. Board of Education of City School District

141 Ohio St. 124 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1943

By virtue of her certification and long employment by the respondent board, relatrix came within the first proviso of Section 7690-2, General Code. (State, ex rel. Bishop, v. Bd. of Edn. of Mt. … Orab Village School Dist., Brown County, 139 Ohio St., 427 , 40 N. E. [2d], 913.)

Frederick Building Co. v. Board of Revision

5 Ohio St. 2d 220 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1966

The board refused to admit this testimony, and it was proffered by the appellants. The principal contention of the appellees is that the mandate in the case of State, ex rel. Park Investment Co., v. … Schneider and Brown, JJ., dissent.

In re Termination of Employment of Pratt

40 Ohio St. 2d 107 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1974

C. 119.12 is a general statute providing for appeals from orders of various administrative agencies, and applies to all orders of the board. State, ex rel. Oliver, v. … Brown, JJ., concur. Corrigan and P. Brown, JJ., concur in paragraph one of the syllabus and dissent from paragraph two of the syllabus and from the opinion and judgment.

Bilchek v. State Personnel Board of Review

41 Ohio St. 2d 181 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1975

Disciplinary Counsel v. Stobbs

172 Ohio St. 3d 636 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 25, 2023

V(13)(C)(1). {¶ 26} In determining the appropriate sanction for Stobbs’s misconduct, the board noted that in Disciplinary Counsel v. … Bar Assn. v.

Dresser Industries, Inc. v. Lindley

12 Ohio St. 3d 68 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1984

Fliteways v. Lindley (1981), 65 Ohio St. 2d 21, 25 [ 19 O.O.3d 219 ]; United States Shoe Corp. v. Kosydar (1975), 41 Ohio St. 2d 68, 71 [ 70 O.O.2d 159 ]; Jim White Chevrolet Co. v. … The decision of the board being neither unreasonable nor unlawful is affirmed. Decision affirmed. Sweeney, Locher, Holmes and C. Brown, JJ., concur. Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown and Hoffman, JJ., dissent.