Lee Turzillo Contracting Co. v. Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority

Jurisdiction of this appeal was accepted for the reason that the operative effect of the controlling legislative enactments, although of long standing, has never received *8more than the cursory attention of this court. See State, ex rel. Nixon, v. M err ell, 126 Ohio St. 239; 127 Ohio St. 72.

Portions of the statutes (in effect prior to amendments effective September 30, 1963) pertinent to the issues here involved and to their resolution read as follows:

“Section 1311.26. Any subcontractor . . . who has performed labor or furnished material, . . . who is performing labor or furnishing material,…