Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Bolce v. Hauser

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1924No. 18812PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

For the purposes of this case the demurrer concedes the truth of the allegations contained in the petition. It is therein alleged that the relators by filing their original plans and .specifications on March 13, 1924, and by preparation of their corrected plans and specifications, had complied with the building code of Cincinnati in force prior to May 4, 1924. It is manifest, therefore, that the relators were entitled to a building permit from the respondent, unless the latter was prevented from issuing the same by reason of the adoption by the city council of the two subsequent ordinances…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hauser v. State Ex Rel. ErdmanOhio Supreme Court · 1925

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API