Legal Opinion
City of East Liverpool v. Columbiana County Budget Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided August 8, 2007No. 2006-1129PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.
{¶ 1} The city of East Liverpool challenges the constitutionality of 2002 Sub.H.B. No. 329 (“H.B. 329”), which changed the procedures by which certain counties, including Columbiana County, may adopt an “alternative method” of apportioning the county’s Undivided Local Government Fund (“ULGF”) and the Undivided Local Government Revenue Assistance Fund (“ULGRAF”) among the political subdivisions of the county. 149 Ohio Laws, Part IV, 7881.
{¶ 2} Because we hold that the H.B. 329 amendments do not violate the constitutional guarantees of uniformity and equal protection and the prohibition against…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Craig v. BorenSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Kowalski v. TesmerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Washington v. Seattle School District No. 1Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Utility Service Partners, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2009
- City of Riverside v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Kanawha Co. Public Library Bd. v. Board of Education of the County of KanawhaWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2013
- City of North Canton v. City of CantonOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- Tobacco Use Prevention & Control Found. Bd. of Trustees v. BoyceOhio Supreme Court · 2010
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.