Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 131
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 131.12 (2026)

Continuous undertaking - new undertaking on increase or decrease of deposits - release

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
October 1, 1953
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 1 - 100th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

The undertaking provided for in section 131.11 of the Revised Code shall be continuous in form and shall remain in full force as to all deposits secured by it until they have been totally withdrawn, including all interest thereon. In case the deposits are increased or decreased or the federal deposit insurance is decreased or increased, the depository may furnish and substitute for said undertaking a good and sufficient new undertaking not less than the excess of the sum then on deposit over the amount of such insurance or in an amount which together with securities legally hypothecated is not less than the excess of the sum so on deposit over the amount of such insurance. Any depository which has furnished more than one undertaking for any deposit may, if such deposit is reduced or if the amount of insurance thereon is increased, obtain the release and surrender of any undertaking if there remain in force to secure said deposit an undertaking and securities, or either, not less than the excess of the sum then on deposit over and above the amount of such insurance. The depositor may release any undertaking and surrender it to the depository upon the total withdrawal of any deposit, or upon the reduction of any deposit and upon the furnishing and acceptance of any new undertaking or securities substituted therefor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1992–2001 · leading case: Columbus & Franklin Cnty. Metro. Park Dist. v. Shank, 600 N.E.2d 1042 (Ohio 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Columbus & Franklin Cnty. Metro. Park Dist. v. Shank, 600 N.E.2d 1042 (Ohio 1992). · cites it 16× “In this regard, Section 131.12, Title 40, C.F.R. states as follows: “(a) The State shall develop and adopt a statewide antidegradation policy and identify the methods for implementing such policy pursuant to this subpart.”
Save the Lake v. Schregardus, 752 N.E.2d 295 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2001). · cites it 20× “Accordingly, the state water quality standards must include an antidegradation policy to ensure that “[e]xisting instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect [those] existing uses [are] maintained and protected.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 131.12(a): 1 case
Save the Lake v. Schregardus, 752 N.E.2d 295 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2001). “Accordingly, the state water quality standards must include an antidegradation policy to ensure that “[e]xisting instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect [those] existing uses [are] maintained and protected.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 131.12(a)(1): 1 case
Save the Lake v. Schregardus, 752 N.E.2d 295 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2001). “Accordingly, the state water quality standards must include an antidegradation policy to ensure that “[e]xisting instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect [those] existing uses [are] maintained and protected.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 131.12(a)(2): 2 cases
Columbus & Franklin Cnty. Metro. Park Dist. v. Shank, 600 N.E.2d 1042 (Ohio 1992). “In this regard, Section 131.12, Title 40, C.F.R. states as follows: “(a) The State shall develop and adopt a statewide antidegradation policy and identify the methods for implementing such policy pursuant to this subpart.”
Save the Lake v. Schregardus, 752 N.E.2d 295 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2001). “Accordingly, the state water quality standards must include an antidegradation policy to ensure that “[e]xisting instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect [those] existing uses [are] maintained and protected.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 131.12(a)(3): 2 cases
Save the Lake v. Schregardus, 752 N.E.2d 295 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2001). “Accordingly, the state water quality standards must include an antidegradation policy to ensure that “[e]xisting instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect [those] existing uses [are] maintained and protected.”
Columbus & Franklin Cnty. Metro. Park Dist. v. Shank, 600 N.E.2d 1042 (Ohio 1992). “In this regard, Section 131.12, Title 40, C.F.R. states as follows: “(a) The State shall develop and adopt a statewide antidegradation policy and identify the methods for implementing such policy pursuant to this subpart.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.