Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 513
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 513.03 (2026)

Exemption from tax levy

✓ current as of May 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
 

In a township in which there is a municipal corporation, the legislative authority of which has already levied a tax for hospital purposes, the board of township trustees may make such levy only on the taxable property of the township outside of the limits of such municipal corporation.

Last updated March 23, 2022 at 3:17 PM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1983–2012 · leading case: City of Medina v. Szwec, 809 N.E.2d 78 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Medina v. Szwec, 809 N.E.2d 78 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 16× “” {¶ 3} In its sole assignment of error, the city asserts that the trial court erroneously concluded that Section 513.03 was in conflict with R.C. 2925.”
City of Niles v. Howard, 466 N.E.2d 539 (Ohio 1984). · cites it 4× “) If the city were correct in asserting that the drug laws are not general laws, then Section 513.03 3 would not be unconstitutional.”
City of Cleveland Heights v. Perryman, 457 N.E.2d 926 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “01(A), and “possession of marijuana” in violation of Municipal Code Section 513.03(A). After a one-day recess to consider these motions, the trial court sent counsel notice that the city’s motion to amend was sustained, defendant’s motion to dismiss was overruled, and the case…”
State v. Glasser, 2012 Ohio 3265 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “) 3 Weinstein & Berger, Weinstein’s Federal Evidence, Section 513.03 (2d Ed.2007). “If objection to the disclosure of a confidential communication must be made in the presence of the jury * * * the benefit of the privilege is largely lost, because the claim of privilege is…”
State v. Clark, 2012 Ohio 2058 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “According to Carpenter, Clark again said that he smoked marijuana every day and Under section 513.03 of the Euclid Codified Ordinances, possession of any 1 amount of marijuana is a first-degree misdemeanor and an arrestable offense.”
State v. Ramsier, 2011 Ohio 2295 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “12(C)(1); possession of marijuana, pursuant to Ashland City Ordinance Section 513.03(C)(3); and disorderly conduct, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Section 2912.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 513.03(A) — 2 cases
City of Medina v. Szwec, 809 N.E.2d 78 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004). “” {¶ 3} In its sole assignment of error, the city asserts that the trial court erroneously concluded that Section 513.03 was in conflict with R.C. 2925.”
City of Cleveland Heights v. Perryman, 457 N.E.2d 926 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983). “01(A), and “possession of marijuana” in violation of Municipal Code Section 513.03(A). After a one-day recess to consider these motions, the trial court sent counsel notice that the city’s motion to amend was sustained, defendant’s motion to dismiss was overruled, and the case…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 513.03(C)(3) — 1 case
State v. Ramsier, 2011 Ohio 2295 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). “12(C)(1); possession of marijuana, pursuant to Ashland City Ordinance Section 513.03(C)(3); and disorderly conduct, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Section 2912.”
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.