Central Motors Corp. v. City of Pepper Pike
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtMarkus, J.
In this declaratory judgment action, plaintiff-landowner asserted that defendant-city prevented plaintiffs intended use of the subject property by invalid zoning revaluation. The trial court conducted a trial and dismissed plaintiffs case at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. This court reversed that ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings. Thereafter, the city rezoned the property in a manner that still prohibited plaintiffs proposed use, and then moved to dismiss the case as moot. Plaintiff responded with a motion to amend its complaint, in order to assert that the new zoning…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Culver v. City of WarrenOhio Court of Appeals · 1948
- Ex parte SteeleDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 1908
- Union Oil Co. v. City of WorthingtonOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Davies v. Columbia Gas & Electric Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wagner v. City of ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
- Cent. Motors Corp. v. Pepper PikeOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. WineOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
- Kline v. Newton FallsOhio Court of Appeals · 2023
- Turner v. Cleveland City School District Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.