L. & M. Investment Co. v. Cutler
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
Since no special findings were made by the Court of Appeals, or bill of exceptions taken, all the controverted issues of fact contained in the pleadings are deemed to have been determined in favor of the defendant in that court. Among other issues thus determined in his favor are that the intended use of the remodeled building was for sanitarium purposes and that “unnecessary hardships” would result to the applicant “in the way of carrying out the. strict letter” of the ordinance requiring a thirty-foot setback. Furthermore, in view of the finding of the Court of Appeals, we must presume that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Dowsey v. Village of KensingtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- People Ex Rel. Fordham Manor Reformed Church v. WalshNew York Court of Appeals · 1927
- Red "C" Oil Manufacturing Co. v. Board of AgricultureSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Welton v. HamiltonIllinois Supreme Court · 1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Johnston v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Schomaeker v. First National Bank of OttawaOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- Village of Hudson v. Albrecht, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
- State, Ex Rel. v. West LakeOhio Supreme Court · 1951
- Freeman v. Board of AdjustmentMontana Supreme Court · 1934
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.