Legal Opinion

Jaylin Investments, Inc. v. Village of Moreland Hills

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 2006No. 2004-1145PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.

{¶ 1} This is an appeal from an action seeking a declaratory judgment that a zoning ordinance, as applied to a landowner’s proposed use of property, is unconstitutional. Specifically, the question before us involves the extent to which a court’s analysis must focus on the owner’s proposed use of the property that is prohibited by the zoning regulation.

{¶ 2} We hold that, in a constitutional analysis, the object of scrutiny is the government’s action; therefore, the state or local law or regulation is the focal point of the analysis, not the property owner’s proposed use. In an “as applied”…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Belden v. Union Central Life Ins.Ohio Supreme Court · 1944
  3. State ex rel. Bray v. RussellOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  4. C. Miller Chevrolet, Inc. v. City of Willoughby HillsOhio Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Shemo v. Mayfield HeightsOhio Supreme Court · 2000

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. State v. HackerOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  2. State ex rel. Scott v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Wymsylo v. Bartec, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2012
  4. State ex rel. Sunset Estate Properties, L.L.C. v. Village of LodiOhio Supreme Court · 2015
  5. State ex rel. Phillips Supply Co. v. CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 2012

32 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