Legal Opinion
Baker v. City of West Carrollton
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided September 2, 1992No. 91-889PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.
R.C. 737.29 and 737.32 govern the disposition of unclaimed property recovered by members of a police force. R.C. 737.29 states:
“Stolen or other property recovered by members of the police force of a municipal corporation shall be deposited and kept in a place designated by the mayor. Each such article shall be entered in a book kept for that purpose, with the name of the owner, if ascertained, the person from whom taken, the place where found with general circumstances, the date of its receipt, and the name of the officer receiving it.
“An inventory of all money or other property shall be…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Noble v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Hilton v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Cascioli v. Central Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. McKelveyOhio Supreme Court · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. PierceOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- In Re Funds in the Possession of Conemaugh Township SupervisorsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- State v. MarkinOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
- Trangenstein v. Wheaton College Board of TrusteesOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
- In Re Funds in the Possession of Conemaugh Township SupervisorsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999