Legal Opinion
Dorrian v. Scioto Conservancy District
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided July 7, 1971No. 70-487PublishedCited by 247 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCook, J.
The sole question presented by this appeal is whether the Scioto Conservancy District is mandated by R. C. 6101.45 and 6101.46 to levy preliminary assessments based upon the benefits determined by the court as provided by R. C. 6101.08 to satisfy its obligation to the city of Columbus. The answer is “no.”
The pertinent part of R. C. 6101.45 reads as follows:
“After the filing of a petition for the organization of a conservancy district and before the district is organized, the cost of publication and other official costs of the proceedings shall be paid out of the general funds of the county in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. International Union United Automobile, Aircraft, & Agricultural Implement WorkersOhio Court of Appeals · 1952
- State ex rel. Mitman v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1916
- State Ex Rel. Tague v. KlingerOhio Supreme Court · 1926
- State Ex Rel. Wendling Bros. v. Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1933
3Cited by247 opinions
- State v. Jones (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
- City of Lakewood v. PapadelisOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- State v. BrimacombeOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
- State v. PalmerOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- The State Ex Rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Lyons, JudgeOhio Supreme Court · 2014
242 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.