Legal Opinion
Ross v. Franko
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 18, 1942No. 29805PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWeygandt, C. J.
The single question of law here presented is whether a private, recorded easement is extinguished when the burdened land is duly forfeited and sold by the state of Ohio for delinquent taxes.
The defendants rely strongly upon two decisions of this court. The first is in the case of Kahle v. Nisley, 74 Ohio St., 328, 78 N. E., 526, in which the syllabus reads as follows:
“Where, under Section 2899, Revised Statutes, lands have been duly forfeited to the state for the nonpayment of taxes and penalty, a valid sale and conveyance of such lands by the county auditor, extinguishes all previous titles…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cech v. SchultzOhio Supreme Court · 1937
3Cited by13 opinions
- Stickney v. City of SacoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- State v. GribbleOhio Supreme Court · 1970
- Alvin v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Engel v. CatucciCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
- Muirfield Ass'n v. Franklin County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1995
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.