City of Sandusky v. City Commission of Sandusky
| Citation | 132 Ohio St. 554,9 N.E.2d 505 |
| Decision Date | 09 June 1937 |
| Docket Number | 26548. |
| Parties | CITY OF SANDUSKY, Appellee, v. CITY COMMISSION OF SANDUSKY et al., Appellants. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
Appeal from Court of Appeals, Erie County.
Bernard S. Keyt, of Piqua, for appellants.
William E. Didelius, City Sol., of Sandusky, for appellee.
It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed, for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.
Appeal dismissed.
JONES, J., not participating.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.
-
Greyhound Food Management, Inc. v. City of Dayton
... ... 198, 39 N.E.2d 148 (1942); State ex rel. Slaughter v. Industrial Commission, 132 Ohio St. 537, 9 N.E.2d 505 (1937). Recently, in French v. Dwiggins, 9 Ohio St.3d 32, 458 ... ...
-
State ex rel. Walmart, Inc. v. Hixson
... ... McTigue, Columbus, for respondent Industrial Commission of Ohio. DECISION BROWN, J. { 1} Relator, Walmart, Inc., ... ...
-
State v. Hudson
... ... -4163, 871 N.E.2d 1167, 8 (statutory interpretation); City of Akron v. Callaway, 162 Ohio App.3d 781, 2005-Ohio-4095, ... ...
-
Harnessing the hired guns: the substantive nature of Ohio Revised Code s. 2743.43 under Article IV, section 5(b) of the Ohio Constitution.
...Ohio long-armed statues to be procedural in nature rather than substantive). (126) Id. (127) State ex rel. Slaughter v. Indus. Comm'n., 9 N.E.2d 505, 543-34 (Ohio 1937) (citing County of Miami v. City of Dayton, 110 N.E. 726, 728 (Ohio (128) See State ex rel. South Euclid v. Zangerle, 62 N.......