Case law

Little Shirley's, Inc. v. Board of Liquor Control

120 Ohio App. 179 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 10, 1963

It is sufficient to say that such argument has little to do with the regularity of the decisions of the board and the affirming of them by the Common Pleas Court. Supreme Court decisions in State, ex rel. Zugravu, v. … O'Brien (1935), 130 Ohio St. 23 , and in Abraham v.

Klingbeil v. Board of Liquor Control

79 Ohio Law. Abs. 194 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 1957

. *195 Judge Leach, in a well-considered opinion, reviewed the legal questions presented and, in our opinion, came to the proper conclusion, that the order of the Board of Liquor Control was supported by reliable, probative … See Ross, etc. v. Board of Liquor Control, 72 Abs 415 , headnotes 1 and 2; also, Abdoney, etc. v. Board of Liquor Control, 72 Abs 513 , headnote 2. We adopt the opinion of Judge Leach and affirm the judgment.

Ray v. Board of Liquor Control

76 Ohio Law. Abs. 156 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 1952

See Russell v. State Bridge Commission, 32 Abs 313 ; Brown v. Brown, 35 Abs 527 ; Parrett v. Parrett, 42 Abs 413 ; Golden v. Fogo, 53 Abs 575 ; Rogers v. Rogers, 55 Abs 221 .

Calderon v. Board of Liquor Control

73 Ohio Law. Abs. 223 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 1954

In Long v. … The appellant relies upon the case of Myers v.

Siebenthaler Co. v. Montgomery County Board of Revision

74 Ohio App. 3d 103 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 14, 1991

Black v. Bd. of Revision (1985), 16 Ohio St.3d 11 , 16 OBR 363, 475 N.E.2d 1264 . … In Johnson v.

Board of Elections of Montgomery County v. Henry

25 Ohio App. 278 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 1927

Meck, v. Board of Elections, 111 Ohio St., 203 , 145 N. E., 28 , applies. … An action in mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel the board of elections to perform a mandatory duty. State, ex rel., v. Tanzey, 49 Ohio St., 656 , 32 N. E., 750 ; State, ex rel. Meck, v.

Fairfield Sanitary Landfill, Inc. v. Board of Health

68 Ohio App. 3d 761 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 1990

Appellee-appellant, Fairfield County District Board of Health ("Board of Health") appeals from a decision of the Environmental Board of Review ("EBR"), which reversed the Board of Health's determination denying appellant-appellee … In Citizens Committee v.

State ex rel. U. J. Cover Seed Co. v. Brown

36 Ohio Law. Abs. 76 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 7, 1942

State ex rel. Greiner v. Board of Purchase

17 Ohio Law. Abs. 244 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 15, 1934

We are further of the opinion that a Board of Purchase is clothed with wide discretion in dealing with the making of contracts, and, as stated by Judge Spear in the State ex v Board, 81 Oh St, 221, “that a Board of Purchase … Board may rescind its action relative to awarding a contract at any time before the contract was reduced to writing and signed.” See Capital Printing Co. v Huey, 140 N. C. 767 . Weitz v Independent Dist., 79 Iowa, 433 .

Brown v. Brown, Unpublished Decision (8-23-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 23, 2002

Brown, appeals from the decision of the Lake County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, granting a divorce to him and appellee, Barbara A. Brown. … State v. Unger (1981), 67 Ohio St.2d 65 , 67 .

Engel v. Crosby Township Board of Zoning Appeals

180 Ohio App. 3d 734 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 2009

board’s decision to the trial court. … See generally Haas v. Sunset Ramblers Motorcycle Club, Inc. (1999), 132 Ohio App.3d 875 , 726 N.E.2d 612 ; Angerman v. Burick, 9th Dist. No. 02CA0028, 2003-Ohio-1469 , 2003 WL *739 1524505; Kramer v.

Bell v. Rocky River Board of Zoning Appeals

122 Ohio App. 3d 672 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 1997

In Brown v. … As we stated in Columbus v.

Brown v. Brown, Unpublished Decision (4-4-2001)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2001

Appellant was required to pay child support to his ex-wife Melanie Brown, appellee, for the care of their two young children, who lived with Ms. Brown. … Marker v. Grimm (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 139 , paragraphs one and two of the syllabus.

Lamb v. Washington Township Board of Zoning Appeals

172 Ohio App. 3d 751 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 10, 2007

Lamb and Mara V. Lamb, filed April 23, 2007. … Bd. of Edn. v. State Emp.

Buckeye Union Insurance v. Arlington Board of Education

93 Ohio App. 3d 285 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 1994

Plaintiff-appellant, Buckeye Union Insurance Company (“appellant”), appeals from the judgment of the Hancock County Court of Common Pleas granting the motion of defendant-appellee, Arlington Board of Education (“appellee” … (Conley v. Gibson [1957], 355 U.S. 41 [ 78 S.Ct. 99 , 2 L.Ed.2d 80 ], followed.)” O’Brien v. Univ.

Eaton v. Board of County Commrs. of Summit County

45 Ohio App. 2d 316 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 1973

The petition was denied and Eaton appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, naming the board of county commissioners of Summit County as appellees. … The case of Weber v. Williams (1972), 32 Ohio App. 2d 65 , holds that the statutory remedy provided by R.

Euclid Manor Nursing Home v. Board of Review

28 Ohio App. 3d 17 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 8, 1985

As a result, the Ohio Supreme Court has concluded that “[t]he decision of purely factual questions is primarily within the province of the referee and the board of review.” Brown-Brockmeyer Co. v. … As just noted, the evidence in the case at bar must support the board of review’s conclusion that the claimant was not discharged for “just cause.” In Sellers v.

Wolford v. Newark City School District Board of Education

73 Ohio App. 3d 218 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 19, 1991

Thereafter, the board filed a motion for Civ.R. 60(B) relief from judgment, and the court eventually granted Civ.R. 60(B) relief. … From that judgment, the plaintiff appeals, claiming favor of R.C. 2505.02 and Chef Italiano Corp. v.

Commons v. Westlake City Schools Board of Education

109 Ohio App. 3d 706 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 1996

Generally, courts must defer to the discretionary judgments of a school board when reviewing decisions of the board. See, e.g., Bd. of Edn. of Rogers, Arkansas v. … A court has no authority to replace the board’s construction of its rules with its own, and consequently find that the board unreasonably interpreted its own rules. Brannon v. Tiro Consol. School Dist.

State Employment Relations Board. v. State

96 Ohio App. 3d 535 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 1994

The findings of the board as to the facts, if supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, are conclusive.” In Lorain City Bd. of Edn. v. State Emp. … Courts must afford due deference to the State Employment Relations Board’s interpretation of R.C. Chapter 4117.” More recently in Univ. Hosp., Univ. of Cincinnati College of Medicine v. State Emp.