Case law

Baxter v. Van Houter

115 Ohio St. 288 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1926

The Court of Appeals dismissed the plaintiffs’ petition, evidently under the authority of the cases of Bashore v. Brown, Treas., 108 Ohio St., 18 , 140 N. E., 489 , and City of Cuyahoga Falls v. … Hutcheson v. Storrie, 92 Tex., 685 , 51 S. W., 848 , 45 L. R. A., 289, 71 Am. St. Rep., 884 ; Board of Directors of Crawford County Levee Dist. v. Dunbar, 107 Ark., 285, 155 S. W., 96 (1913); State ex rel.

State Ex Rel. Arey v. Sherrill

142 Ohio St. 574 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1944

Billings v. Cleveland Ry. Co., 92 Ohio St., 478 , 111 N. E., 155 ; State, ex rel. Giovanello, v. Village of Lowellville, 139 Ohio St., 219 , 39 N. E. (2d), 527; State, ex rel. Daly, v. City of Toledo, ante, 123. … Nolan, v. ClenDening, 93 Ohio St., 264 , 112 N. E., 1029 ; State, ex rel. McCrehen, v. Brown, Secy. of State, 108 Ohio St., 454 , 141 N. E., 69 ; State, ex rel. Schorr, v.

Scot Lad Foods, Inc. v. Secretary of State

66 Ohio St. 2d 1 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 8, 1981

Brown, principal, and the Buckeye Union Insurance Company, surety. The bond provides for joint and several liability of the principal and surety, presumably upon a premium paid to Buckeye. In Cusack v. … In Cusack v. McGrain, supra, at page 31, it is stated: “In the leading case of American Guaranty Co. v.

Armour & Co. v. Kosydar

46 Ohio St. 2d 450 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1976

New York v. Latrobe (1929), 279 U. S. 421, 427 . Since 1919, this court has itself recognized the qualitative difference between property and franchise taxes. See State, ex rel. Zielonka, v. … Brown, JJ., concur. • \....

State, Ex Rel. v. Bd. of Elec.

111 Ohio St. 203 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 7, 1924

to the board of deputy state supervisors of the county in such district in which the nomination papers were originally filed, which board shall proceed to canvass all of the returns so made of the votes cast for the respective … Wood , v. Russell et al., Deputy State Supervisors , 101 Ohio St. 365 , 130 N.E. 19 .

City of Girard v. Trumbull County Budget Commission

70 Ohio St. 3d 187 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 7, 1994

In Budget Comm. of Brown Cty. v. … Russell v. Geauga Cty.

Maloney v. Rhodes

45 Ohio St. 2d 319 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1976

No. 43 (to eliminate the discretionary power of the Secretary of State in the appointment of members of boards of elections and to add a ground for their removal); Am. H. B. … Brown, J., concurs in the foregoing concurring opinion.

Plumbers & Steamfitters Joint Apprenticeship Committee v. Ohio Civil Rights Commission

66 Ohio St. 2d 192 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 20, 1981

The nature of this burden was further explained in Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters (1978), 438 U. S. 567 , and Board of Trustees of Keene State College v. Sweeney (1978), 439 U. … Brown, P. Brown, Locher and C. Brown, JJ., concur. Holmes, J., concurs in the judgment. The enumerated agencies to which R. C.

State ex rel. Greene Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. O'Diam (Slip Opinion)

156 Ohio St. 3d 458 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 7, 2019

Hemsley v. … Bittikofer v. Babst, 97 Ohio St. 64, 119 N.E. 136 (1917); Zangerle v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 141 Ohio St. 70, 46 N.E.2d 865 (1943); State ex rel. Finley v.

Stewart v. Midwestern Indemnity Co.

45 Ohio St. 3d 124 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 23, 1989

In Bellaire City Schools Bd. of Edn. v. … Brown and Re snick, JJ., concur. Douglas and Wright, JJ., dissent separately.

State ex rel. McIntyre v. Mininni

32 Ohio St. 2d 17 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1972

In Williams v. Rhodes (1968), 393 U. … Leach and Brown, JJ., dissent.

Rover Pipeline, L.L.C. v. Harris

2025 Ohio 2806 · Ohio Supreme Court · Aug 13, 2025

The board cites PacifiCorp v. … In support of this argument, Rover cites, among other decisions, Cincinnati Milacron Industries, Inc. v. Brown Cty.

Bockover v. Ludlow Corp.

23 Ohio St. 3d 190 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1986

Columbus-Suburban Coach Lines v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1969), 20 Ohio St. 2d 125, 127 [ 49 O.O.2d 445 ]. See, also, Dougherty v. Torrence (1982), 2 Ohio St. 3d 69, 70 . … Brown, Douglas and Wright, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. Perry Twp. Bd. of Trustees v. Husted (Slip Opinion)

154 Ohio St. 3d 174 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 21, 2018

PERRY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES v. HUSTED, SECY., ET AL. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. … Willke v. Taft, 107 Ohio St.3d 1, 2005-Ohio-5303, 836 N.E.2d 536, ¶ 22.

Mahoning County Bar Ass'n v. Sinclair

105 Ohio St. 3d 65 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 29, 2004

Dayton Bar Assn. v. … Disciplinary Counsel v. Shaffer, 98 Ohio St.3d 342, 2003-Ohio-1008, 785 N.E.2d 429. {¶ 36} We do, however, accept all the other factors listed by the panel and board as mitigating.

Salzl v. Gibson Greeting Cards, Inc.

61 Ohio St. 2d 35 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1980

See Garvin v. Giles (Lucas Co. 1977), 55 Ohio App. 2d 1 (benefits granted); Mayer v. Gray Drug Stores (Richland Co. June 29, 1978), No. CA 1716, unreported (benefits granted); May Co. v. … Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney and Jackson, JJ., concur. Holmes, J. dissents. Jackson, J., of the Eighth Appellate District, sitting for Locher, J.

Rigg v. Correction Department

170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 347 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1960

Hanna Mining Co. v. Limbach

20 Ohio St. 3d 3 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1985

In one, Lancaster Colony v. … Accordingly, the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded to the Tax Commissioner for further proceedings. Decision reversed. Sweeney, Holmes, C. Brown and Wright, JJ., concur.

Masheter v. Hoffman

34 Ohio St. 2d 213 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1973

Co. v. Gorsuch (1905), 8 C. C. (N. S.) 297. … Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

Jewell v. McCann

95 Ohio St. (N.S.) 191 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1917

reference to an *192 application filed in the office of said board for the revocation of the certificate of plaintiff, theretofore issued to him by said board in the manner provided by law,, authorizing him to engage in … affirming or overruling the action of the state board shall be final.” (103 O.