The mayor of a municipal corporation shall have general supervision over each department and the officers provided for in Title VII of the Revised Code. When the mayor has reason to believe that the head of a department or such officer has been guilty, in the performance of his official duty, of bribery, misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, misconduct in office, gross neglect of duty, gross immorality, or habitual drunkenness, he shall immediately file with the legislative authority, except when the removal of such head of department or officer is otherwise provided for, written charges against such person, setting forth in detail a statement of such alleged guilt, and, at the same time, or as soon thereafter as possible, serve a true copy of such charges upon the person against whom they are made. Such service may be made on the person or by leaving a copy of the charges at the office of such person. Return thereof shall be made to the legislative authority, as is provided for the return of the service of summons in a civil action.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1960–2024 · leading case: Hurt v. Liberty Twp., 2017 Ohio 7820 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
Hurt v. Liberty Twp., 2017 Ohio 7820 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 15דIn order to be removed from that office, the appointing authority must follow the removal proceedings contained in R.C. 733.35 to 733.39. Consistent with R.”
Nosse v. Kirtland, 2022 Ohio 4161 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 17ד” It further stated that pursuant to R.C. 733.35, Nosse was “guilty in the performance of [his] official duty of misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, misconduct in office, gross neglect of duty, and/or habitual drunkenness.”
Roseman v. Vill. of Reminderville, 470 N.E.2d 224 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 5דIV R.C. 733.35 provides, in part: “The mayor of a municipal corporation shall have general supervision over each department and the officers provided for in Title VII of the Revised Code.”
Peters v. City of Jackson, 653 N.E.2d 1238 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 6דIn Jaeger the Ninth District followed Dougherty and reasoned that a township volunteer firefighter may not be dismissed or removed without compliance with the statutory procedures found in R.C. 733.35 through 733.39. 4 Appellant urges *310 us to apply the Jaeger reasoning to R.”
Fulmer v. W. Licking Jt. Fire Dist., 2016 Ohio 5301 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 16ד) {¶18} R.C. 733.35 states the following: The mayor of a municipal corporation shall have general supervision over each department and the officers provided for in Title VII of the Revised Code.”
Nosse v. Potter, 2024 Ohio 2325 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 5דHe alleged that the defendants participated in a “sham investigation” and that the charges brought against him under R.C. 733.35 leading to his termination “were false and a pretext for the real motivating reason for Potter’s removal of Nosse under R.”
Crist v. Battle Run Fire Dist. Bd. of Trs., 663 N.E.2d 722 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 5ד38 provides that the board shall appoint the fire chief, who continues in office until removed therefrom as provided in R.C. 733.35 to 733.39. To initiate removal proceedings, the board is to designate a private citizen to investigate and prepare any necessary charges.”
McKendry v. Union Twp., 633 F. Supp. 188 (S.D. Ohio 1986). · cites it 6ד1 It states further that “[s]uch appointees shall continue in office until removed therefrom” as provided by sections 733.35 to 733.39 of the Revised Code.”
Hurt v. Liberty Twp., 2017 Ohio 825 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2017). · cites it 5דR.C. 733.35 to 733.39. When a township has reason to believe that a fire chief has been guilty of the same offenses, R.”
Kiser v. Lowe, 236 F. Supp. 2d 872 (S.D. Ohio 2002). · cites it 5דTherefore, the Court GRANTS the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on the Plaintiffs claim brought pursuant to 42 U.”
Kalk v. Vill. of Woodmere, 500 N.E.2d 384 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2ד36 which provides, “[cjharges filed with the legislative authority under section 733.35 of the Revised Code [mayor shall file charges against delinquent officers], shall be heard at the next regular meeting thereof.”
Bowman v. Butler Twp. Bd. of Trs., 923 N.E.2d 663 (Ohio Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2ד38 provides for the removal of firefighters in accordance with R.C. 733.35. R.C. 733.35 provides that an officer may be removed if he “has been guilty, in the performance of his official duty, of bribery, misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, misconduct in office, gross neglect…”
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.