Masheter v. Boehm
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSilbert, J.
This is an appeal in a land appropriation case. Appellant as Director of Highways (hereafter also referred to as “the state”)? brought this proceeding to appropriate premises owned and used by the appellees in the manufacture of pressed steel parts, a manufacturing operation requiring the use of a variety of heavy machinery located on the subject property. The land is needed for the construction of Interstate 90.
The state presents two assignments of error, complaining that the probate court erroneously: (1) found and instructed the jury that certain items were to be classified as fixtures,…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited23 opinions
- United States v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Jackson v. . State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Sowers v. SchaefferOhio Supreme Court · 1951
- Smith v. Erie Rd. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1938
- Zangerle v. Republic Steel Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1945
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cluxton v. Fifth Third Bank (In Re Cluxton)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Continental ExpressCuyahoga County Common Pleas Court · 1999
- In Re:Daniel Cluxton v.Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Pandora Distribution, LLC v. Ottawa OH, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2019