Legal Opinion

City of Lancaster v. Fairfield County Budget Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1998No. 97-1814PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCook, J.

Lancaster is convinced that the General Assembly could not have intended that Columbus, with far fewer citizens to be affected by a decision relating to.Fairfield County than Lancaster, have such a significant say in that county’s financial affairs. But, because the words used by the General Assembly are only understandable as disfavoring Lancaster’s position, this court must apply those words without assessing Lancaster’s public policy concerns.

I

In its first proposition of law, Lancaster argues that the phrase “the legislative authority of the city, located wholly or partially in the county,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Provident Bank v. WoodOhio Supreme Court · 1973

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Ohio Neighborhood Fin., Inc. v. Scott (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Zumwalde v. Madeira & Indian Hill Joint Fire DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Buddenberg v. Weisdack (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  4. Moore v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Harsco Corp. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1999

13 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