Grandle v. Rhodes
| Decision Date | 01 April 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 35669,35669 |
| Citation | 169 Ohio St. 77,157 N.E.2d 336 |
| Parties | , 8 O.O.2d 40 GRANDLE, Appellant, v. RHODES, Aud., Appellee. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Section 5a, Article XII of the Constitution of Ohio, closely restricts the expenditure of the fees and taxes received in relation to vehicles using the public highways to purposes directly connected with the construction, maintenance and repair of highways and the enforcement of traffic laws; and the words, 'other statutory highway purposes,' as used in such section cannot be extended to comprehend the payment of fees to attorneys of a taxpayer who in an action brought for such purpose successfully blocks the disbursement of a sum of money appropriated by the General Assembly for a preliminary study in connection with the contemplated construction of a parking garage underneath the Statehouse grounds in Columbus.
2. Under the provisions of Sections 22 and 29, Article II of the Constitution of Ohio, before money may be taken from the state treasury specific authorization therefor must be by action of the General Assembly in the manner prescribed, and, where it appears that there has been no authorization by the General Assembly for the withdrawal of funds, the doors of the state treasury must remain closed to those seeking attorney fees for services rendered in a taxpayer's successful action to prevent the expenditure of public funds.
In its present aspect, this cause involves an application for the allowance of attorney fees directed initially to the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County and which was denied. Such adjudication was affirmed on an appeal on questions of law to the Court of Appeals, and an appeal as of right and the allowance of a motion to certify the record place the matter before this court for disposition.
The litigation at hand arose in this way:
As shown by the case of Grandle v. Rhodes, 166 Ohio St. 108, 139 N.E.2d 328, on rehearing 166 Ohio St. 197, 140 N.E.2d 897, Grandle succeeded in preventing the expenditure of $64,500 by the Director of Highways of the state of Ohio from the Highway Improvement Fund to pay the cost of certain engineering studies and survers connected with the proposed construction of a parking garage for motor vehicles under the Statehouse grounds in Columbus.
Following the final judgment for Grandle by this court on March 6, 1957, on the rehearing, the cause was returned to the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County for further proceedings, including the making of an order against the Auditor of State prohibiting the expenditure of the $64,500, or any part thereof, for the purpose above described.
Grandle having instituted the action as a taxpayer and having attained his objective, his counsel then applied for an allowance to them of attorney fees for their successful efforts.
John A. Lloyd, Jr., and James G. Andrews, Jr., Cincinnati, for appellant.
William Saxbe and Mark McElroy, Attys. Gen., and Hugh A. Sherer, Columbus, for appellee.
The claim for the allowance of attorney fees is predicated entirely on Section 5a, Article XII of the Constitution of Ohio, which reads:
'No moneys derived from fees, excises, or license taxes relating to registration, operation, or use of vehicles on public highways, or to fuels used for propelling such vehicles, shall be expended for other than costs of administering such laws, statutory refunds and adjustments provided therein, payment of highway obligations, costs for construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair of public highways and bridges and other statutory highway purposes, expense of state enforcement of traffic laws, and expenditures authorized for hospitalization of indigent persons injured in motor vehicle accidents on the public highways.'
Both the Court of Common Pleas and the Court of Appeals in essence took the position that the 'costs,' referred to in the above-quote section, are the 'costs of the above-quoted section, are the 'costs of administering such laws'; and that 'such excises, or license taxes relating to registration, operation, or use of vehicles on public highways, or to fuels used for propelling such vehicles' and may not be extended and broadened to embrace costs incurred for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor v. Perini, 73-2071
...fees to be paid out of the state treasury must be authorized by a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly. Grandle v. Rhodes, 169 Ohio St. 77, 157 N.E.2d 336 (1959). Thus, we find that the state has not conferred on its Attorney General the authority to consent in individual cases to a paym......
-
Jordon v. Gilligan
...from awards of attorneys' fees in the absence of a consent rendered by a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly. Grandle v. Rhodes, 169 Ohio St. 77, 157 N.E.2d 336 (1959); see also, Constitution of Ohio, Art. II, 22 & 29. The State of Ohio has not waived its immunity in this In Gates v. Co......
-
State of Ohio v. Madeline Marie Nursing Homes No. 1 and No. 2
...it unnecessary to reach Eleventh Amendment issue found in Taylor v. Perini ). Taylor v. Perini in turn relied upon Grandle v. Rhodes, 169 Ohio St. 77, 157 N.E.2d 336 (1959). The rationale of Grandle v. Rhodes is clearly expressed in its Under the provisions of Sections 22 and 29, Article II......
-
City of Seven Hills v. City of Cleveland, s. 53565
... ... In 1959, the Supreme Court held in Grandle v. Rhodes (1959), 169 Ohio St. 77, 8 O.O.2d 40, 157 N.E.2d 336, that if the fund from which attorney fees were to be paid was a general public fund, ... ...