Legal Opinion

City of Canton v. State

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 8, 2002No. 2000-2130PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.

{¶ 1} For many years, the city of Canton has prohibited the placement or use of mobile homes as principal or accessory structures for residential use. Canton Codified Ordinances 1129.11. On March 16, 1998, the city of Canton amended its code to include “manufactured homes” within the definition of “mobile homes.” Ordinance No. 49/98, amending Canton Codified Ordinances 1123.57(b). As a result, manufactured homes became prohibited within the city limits as principal or accessory structures for residential use.

{¶ 2} In 1998, the Ohio General Assembly enacted R.C. 3781.184, as part of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Schneiderman v. SesansteinOhio Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Village of West Jefferson v. RobinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Garcia v. Siffrin Residential Ass'nOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Ohio Ass'n of Private Detective Agencies, Inc. v. City of North OlmstedOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Clermont Environmental Reclamation Co. v. WiederholdOhio Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Canton v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. American Financial Services Ass'n v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Cleveland v. State (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  4. Midwest Retailer Associated, Ltd. v. City of ToledoDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2008
  5. City of Cincinnati v. BaskinOhio Supreme Court · 2006

17 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