Legal Opinion

Wolfe v. City of Avon

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 1984No. 83-1315PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

The facts would support the conclusion that Wolfe had not properly filed his objections to the proposed assessments pursuant to R.C. 727.15, so therefore had waived this avenue of challenge to such assessments. See Wagner v. Messner (1940), 136 Ohio St. 514 [17 O.O. 155]. However, this untimeliness does not preclude a property owner from questioning the assessment on constitutional grounds. Domito v. Maumee (1942), 140 Ohio St. 229 [23 O.O. 434], paragraph two of the syllabus. This is the stance of the controversy before us. Appellant argues that when a special assessment is substantially…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Schiff v. City of ColumbusOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Glass v. DrydenOhio Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Domito v. Village of MaumeeOhio Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Gates Co. v. Housing Appeals BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Wagner v. Messner, Aud.Ohio Supreme Court · 1940

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Thomas v. City of BeavercreekOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Wenz v. Rossford Ohio Transportation Improvement DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2005
  3. Williams v. Schneider, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County2018
  4. Singer v. TroyOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. Abram v. City of Avon LakeOhio Court of Appeals · 2008

10 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