If the director of transportation is unable to purchase property for any purpose related to highways, roads, or bridges authorized by Chapters 5501., 5503., 5511., 5513., 5515., 5516., 5517., 5519., 5521., 5523., 5525., 5527., 5528., 5529., 5531., 5533., and 5535. of the Revised Code, or, if the Ohio rail development commission is unable to purchase property for any purpose necessary for the implementation of rail service under Chapter 4981. of the Revised Code, the director shall issue, or the commission shall enter on the records of the commission, a finding that it is necessary, for the public convenience and welfare, to appropriate such property as the director or commission considers needed for such purposes. The finding shall contain a definite, accurate, and detailed description of the property, and the name and place of residence, if known or with reasonable diligence ascertainable, of the owner of the property appropriated. The commission shall submit to the director a copy of its record finding that the appropriation of property is necessary. The commission shall not proceed with the appropriation unless it is first approved by the director.
The director or commission, in such finding, shall fix what the director or commission considers to be the value of such property appropriated, together with damages to the residue, and deposit the value thereof, together with the damages, with the probate court or the court of common pleas of the county within which the property, or a part thereof, is situated. The power to appropriate property for any purpose authorized by such chapters shall be exercised in the manner provided in sections 163.01 to 163.22 of the Revised Code.
Any instrument by which real property is acquired pursuant to this section shall identify the agency of the state that has the use and benefit of the real property as specified in section 5301.012 of the Revised Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1957–2021 · leading case: Masheter v. Diver, 253 N.E.2d 780 (Ohio 1969).
Masheter v. Diver, 253 N.E.2d 780 (Ohio 1969). · cites it 5ד11, Revised Code, and designates the interests taken as “all right, title and interest,” he takes all that the owner possesses including the invisible as well as the visible.”
Proctor v. NJR Props., L.L.C., 887 N.E.2d 376 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2008). “{¶ 2} Plaintiff-appellee, Gordon Proctor, the Director of the Ohio Department of Transportation (“ODOT”), filed the appropriation proceeding, pursuant to R.C. 5519.01 and R.C. Chapter 163, against NJR and others to determine the amount of compensation for the taking of NJR’s…”
Dir. of Highways v. Olrich, 213 N.E.2d 823 (Ohio 1966). · cites it 2ד02, Revised Code, provides that the director, “if he has not occupied or changed the property appropriated, may, at any time but not later than 30 days after the final determination of the cause, elect to *73 abandon the appropriation proceedings upon the payment of the costs…”
Sedlak v. City of Solon, 661 N.E.2d 265 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1995). “If, however, he is unable to reach an agreement with a property owner, he may appropriate that property pursuant to R.C. 5519.01 or R.C. Chapter 163. This was the process followed by the Director in acquiring the land necessary for the construction of Erico Drive.”
Masheter v. Blaisdell, 282 N.E.2d 42 (Ohio 1972). · cites it 2דSection 5519.01, Revised Code, specifically provides that the finding shall contain a definite, accurate and detailed description of the property, and that the director shall fix what he deems to be the * * * damages to the residue.”
Masheter v. Junk, 215 N.E.2d 381 (Ohio 1966). · cites it 2דPursuant to Section 5519.01, Eevised Code, the director in November 1962 entered on his journal that it was necessary to appropriate certain land of Loutie Junk and other owners in Madison County for the construction of a highway.”
Masheter v. Cleveland Bd. of Educ., 244 N.E.2d 745 (Ohio 1969). · cites it 2דThat authority is contained in Section 5519.01, Revised Code. The first question for decision is, what is the measure of compensation to be awarded the owner? Did the court err in its directions to the jury in respect to determination of the true value in money for the property…”
Dir. of Highways v. Spice, 193 N.E.2d 94 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1963). · cites it 2ד” Thereafter, a hearing was had on these motions, and the trial court entered in each case an order that the resolution and finding, as filed by the Director of Highways, did not comply with the requirements of Section 5519.01 of the Revised Code of Ohio, in that it did not…”
State ex rel. Cent. Serv. Station, Inc. v. Masheter, 218 N.E.2d 177 (Ohio 1966). · cites it 2דBelator contends (1) that, by temporary interference with relator’s easement of access, the highway director has taken relator’s property, and (2) that Section 5519.01, Revised Code, imposes upon the director a duty to fix what the director deems to be the value of that easement…”
Barnhardt v. Linzell, 148 N.E.2d 242 (Ohio Ct. App. 1957). · cites it 2דThe facts before us, in brief, are these: The Director of Highways, in the process of appropriating the property of the appellees for highway purposes, filed resolutions, findings and other material required by the provisions of Section 5519.01, Revised Code, in the Common Pleas…”
Preston v. Keller, 115 Ohio App. 197 (Ohio Ct. App. 1961). · cites it 9דThe Director of Highways filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Auglaize County his resolution and finding pursuant to Section 5519.01 of the Revised Code for the appropriation of easements over certain lands owned by Edison J.”
Smith v. Gilbraith, 548 N.E.2d 281 (Ohio Ct. App. 11th Dist. 1988). “That question is resolved in R.C. 5519.01, entitled “Appropriation of Property.”
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.