Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Johnston v. Taulbee

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 17, 1981No. 80-1437PublishedCited by 67 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.

Appellants, in their first proposition of law, assert that, pursuant to R. C. 2151.10, the board of county *419commissioners is required to determine and appropriate a sum of money reasonably necessary to meet all the administrative expenses of the Juvenile Court.

We find no merit in this contention, in that R. C. 2151.10 is an impermissible legislative encroachment upon the judiciary, and is, therefore, unconstitutional.

R. C. 2151.10, effective July 26,1979, reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

“The juvenile judge shall annually submit a written request for an appropriation to the board of county…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Foster v. WittenbergOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Zangerle v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  3. State ex rel. Giuliani v. PerkOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  4. State ex rel. Edwards v. MurrayOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  5. State ex rel. Lorig v. Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1977

3Cited by67 opinions

  1. State v. BodykeOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  2. State v. DelvallieOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  3. Woods v. TelbOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  4. City of Norwood v. HorneyOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. HochhauslerOhio Supreme Court · 1996

62 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