Legal Opinion

In re Appropriation for Hwy. Purposes of Land of Seas

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 18, 1969No. 68-556PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, Acting C. J.

Special instructions Nos. 2, 3 and 4, given by the trial court to the jury, read as follows:

Special Instruction No. 2. “I charge you that after the project and as a result of it the property of Mr. and Mrs. *216Seas will have lost its commercial status under the Marion Township zoning regulations the property may not be thereafter used for commercial purposes.’’

Special Instruction No. 3. “You are instructed as a matter of law that after the project the lot of Mr. and Mrs. Seas will not any longer abut on or have the front lot line on United States Route 30-S. After the project the Seas property…

2Cited by13 opinions

  1. Ohio Ass'n of Public School Employees v. Twin Valley Local School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Lake County National Bank of Painesville v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Edens v. Barberton Area Family Practice CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Key Ads, Inc. v. Dayton Bd. of Zoning AppealsOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. In re Civil Service Charges & Specifications Against PiperOhio Supreme Court · 2000

8 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