Legal Opinion

City of Lima v. State

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 2009No. 2008-0128 and 2008-0418PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

{¶ 1} R.C. 9.481(B)(1) states that “no political subdivision shall require any of its employees, as a condition of employment, to reside in any specific area of the state.” The issue in this case is whether R.C. 9.481 was enacted pursuant to the authority granted to the General Assembly by Section 34, Article II of the Ohio Constitution. If it was so enacted, its provisions override any conflicting law of a political subdivision, including residency requirements imposed by municipalities pursuant to the Home Rule Amendment, Section 3, Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution. We hold that R.C.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. City of Rocky River v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. American Ass'n of University Professors v. Central State UniversityOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State ex rel. Board of Trustees of Police & Firemen's Pension Fund v. Board of Trustees of Police Relief, & Pension FundOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Central Ohio Transit Authority v. Transport Workers Union of AmericaOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. State v. Akron, Unpublished Decision (1-9-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Kaminski v. Metal & Wire Products Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Cleveland v. State (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Cincinnati v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  4. Kaminski v. Metal & Wire Products Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Cleveland Firefighters Assn. v. ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 2013

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API