Legal Opinion
City of Norwood v. Horney
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided May 20, 2005No. Nos. C-040683 and C-040783PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Mark P. Painter, Judge.
{¶ 1} In this eminent-domain dispute, plaintiffs-appellants, Joseph P. Horney, Carol S. Gooch, and Carl and Joy Gamble (collectively, the “owners”), appeal the trial court’s judgment allowing defendant-appellee, the city of Norwood, to take property through appropriation. The owners’ property was taken to allow the Rookwood Partners, Ltd. (“Rookwood”) to build the Rookwood Exchange (“the project”).
{¶ 2} There’s no place like home. And despite Rookwood’s attempts to privately acquire the property, the owners consistently refused to sell. So Rookwood got Norwood involved,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
- Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Wayne County v. HathcockMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Brown v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Contributors to the Pennsylvania Hospital v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of Norwood v. HorneyOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- City of Norwood v. BurtonOhio Court of Appeals · 2005