Legal Opinion

City of Cincinnati v. Budget Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 1988No. 86-2053PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Relying on Springfield v. Bethel Twp. (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 132, 15 O.O. 3d 165, 399 N.E. 2d 1237, and Cincinnati v. Budget Comm. of Hamilton Cty. (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 137, 25 OBR 184, 495 N.E. 2d 396, the county argues that the BTA should have reviewed the cross-assignment of error. Cincinnati argues that it was the only party that had perfected an appeal and that the dismissal of its notice of appeal prior to the commencement of the hearing conformed to the rules of the BTA. Appellee city of Wyoming agrees with Cincinnati, stating further that an appellant may dismiss an appeal to the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. City of Painesville v. Lake County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. City of Brooklyn v. Cuyahoga County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Budget Commission v. Village of GeorgetownOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Village of South Russell v. Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. City of Cincinnati v. Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Huber Heights Circuit Courts, Ltd. v. CarneOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Huber Hts. Circuit Courts, Ltd. v. CarneOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Franklin County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Village of North Perry v. Lake County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. N. Perry v. Lake Cty. Budget Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API