Legal Opinion
Perez v. Cleveland
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided May 14, 1997No. 1996-0108PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 78 Ohio St.3d 376.] PEREZ ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. CLEVELAND, CTY. CORONER, APPELLEE. [Cite as Perez v. Cleveland,
1997-Ohio-33.] Coroners—Use of declaratory judgment for challenging a coroner’s verdict is inappropriate—R.C. 313.19, delimiting the procedure for challenging a coroner’s verdict, is not void for vagueness due to its lack of specificity. 1. Because R.C. 313.19 delimits the procedure for challenging a coroner’s verdict, use of declaratory judgment to resolve those same issues is inappropriate. (State ex rel. Albright v.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Smith v. GoguenSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hardin v. Kentucky Utilities Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. DorsoOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. AndersonOhio Supreme Court · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Carlisle v. Martz Concrete Co., Ca2006-06-067 (8-27-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- State v. CorneliusOhio Court of Appeals · 2011