Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Ohio opinions name it 4 courts 1907–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State Ex Rel. Finkbeiner v. Lucas County Board of Electionsgreen2 sentences2021Accord Finkbeiner, 122 Ohio St.3d 462 , 2009-Ohio-3657, at ¶ 38 (noting that the “charter requirement should be construed in pari materia with other requirements, including the applicable statutory requirements, like the election- falsification statement required by R.C. 3501.38(J) and incorporated by Section 11 of the Toledo Charter”). 2021Accord Finkbeiner, 122 Ohio St.3d 462 , 2009-Ohio-3657, at ¶ 38 (noting that the “charter requirement should be construed in pari materia with other requirements, including the applicable statutory requirements, like the election- falsification statement required by R.C. 3501.38(J) and incorporated by Section 11 of the Toledo Charter”). | 1 | 1 |
Frecker v. City of Daytongreen2 sentences2009Cf. State v. Sterling, 113 Ohio St.3d 255 , 2007-Ohio-1790 , 864 N.E.2d 630, ¶ 40-41 ; see also Frecker v. Dayton (1950), 153 Ohio St. 14, 26 , 41 O.O. 109 , 90 N.E.2d 851 (“rule, as to 6 January Term, 2009 the severability of statutes and the elimination of unconstitutional provisions, applies to municipal ordinances”). 2009Cf. State v. Sterling, 113 Ohio St.3d 255 , 2007-Ohio-1790 , 864 N.E.2d 630, ¶ 40-41 ; see also Frecker v. Dayton (1950), 153 Ohio St. 14, 26 , 41 O.O. 109 , 90 N.E.2d 851 (“rule, as to 6 January Term, 2009 the severability of statutes and the elimination of unconstitutional provisions, applies to municipal ordinances”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Downing v. City of Miltonvale
neutral
2 sentences1907In the case of Downing v. Miltonvale, 36 Kan. 740 [ 14 Pac. 1907In the ease of Downing v. Miltonvale, 36 Kan., 740 , with reference to a statute which provided that “All ordinances of the city shall be read and considered by sections at a public meeting of the council, and the vote on their final passage shall be taken by ‘yeas and nays,’ which shall be entered on the journal by the clerk,” it was held that where the journal shows the full vote adopting the ordinance as a whole on its final passage, it will be presumed that it was read and adopted by sections. | 2 | 1907–1907 |
Hulsmeyer v. Hospice of Southwest Ohio, Inc. (Slip Opinion)
green
1 sentence2021“In reading statutes in pari materia and construing them together, this court must give a reasonable construction that provides the proper effect to each statute.” (Citation omitted.) Hulsmeyer v. Hospice of Southwest Ohio, Inc., 142 Ohio St.3d 236 , 2014- Ohio-5511, ¶ 22. {¶24} Here, the charter requirement should be read in pari materia with R.C. 3503.02. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State, Ex Rel. Pecyk v. Greene
green
2 sentences2011Any office created by the will of the people can be abolished at any time by the will of the people. * * * The people have the power to give and the people have the power to take away.” Id. at 304 . {¶ 77} These Lockean principles succinctly put by this court in a charter challenge still ring true today. “[E]very man, by consenting with others to make one body politic under one government, puts himself under an obligation, to every one of that society, to submit to the determination of the majority, and to be concluded by it; or else this original compact, whereby he with others incorporates i 2011Any office created by the will of the people can be abolished at any time by the will of the people. * * * The people have the power to give and the people have the power to take away.” Id. at 304 . {¶ 77} These Lockean principles succinctly put by this court in a charter challenge still ring true today. “[E]very man, by consenting with others to make one body politic under one government, puts himself under an obligation, to every one of that society, to submit to the determination of the majority, and to be concluded by it; or else this original compact, whereby he with others incorporates i | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Sterling
green
2 sentences2009Cf. State v. Sterling, 113 Ohio St.3d 255 , 2007-Ohio-1790 , 864 N.E.2d 630, ¶ 40-41 ; see also Frecker v. Dayton (1950), 153 Ohio St. 14, 26 , 41 O.O. 109 , 90 N.E.2d 851 (“rule, as to 6 January Term, 2009 the severability of statutes and the elimination of unconstitutional provisions, applies to municipal ordinances”). 2009Cf. State v. Sterling, 113 Ohio St.3d 255 , 2007-Ohio-1790 , 864 N.E.2d 630, ¶ 40-41 ; see also Frecker v. Dayton (1950), 153 Ohio St. 14, 26 , 41 O.O. 109 , 90 N.E.2d 851 (“rule, as to 6 January Term, 2009 the severability of statutes and the elimination of unconstitutional provisions, applies to municipal ordinances”). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State ex rel. Pinzone v. City of Cleveland
neutral
1 sentence1986Gibbons, v. Cleveland, supra, the city of Cleveland’s Civil Service Commission certified the names of eighteen patrolmen of the Cleveland Police Department who had passed the examination and were eligible for promotion to sergeant. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.