Legal Opinion
Haas v. Jennings
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided April 24, 1929No. 21371, 21373 and 21374PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
The single question presented here is whether the charter of the city of Toledo, or Sections 3515-37 and 3515-59, General Code (103 O. L., 775, 781), confer the power upon the investigating committee appointed by the mayor to commit the defendants in error in the several cases to imprisonment for contempt.
The record does not disclose any action by the council of the city authorizing or requiring the mayor or the committee to make an investigation of the division of police. The investigation, there-ore, must be considered as an investigation by the (executive department, as distinguished from…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- McGrain v. DaughertySupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- People v. McNultyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Carlock v. CagnacciCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- McNulty v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- State Ex Rel. Turner v. AlbinOhio Supreme Court · 1928
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Appalachian Power Co. v. Public Service CommissionWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1982
- Burns v. RiceOhio Court of Appeals · 2004
- In re Contemnor Caron, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division2000
- Smith v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
- Wright v. Plaza FordNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1978
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.