Legal Opinion

Steuer v. McConnel

Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court

Decided July 1, 1900Published

1Opinion of the CourtWing, J.

It is claimed that the resolution of September 10th, which purports to authorize the committee named, to hold the investigation in the course of which the commitment, the legality of which is under consideration, was made, is invalid because it involves the expenditure of money, and also because some of the prerequisites to such legislation as are required by section 1545-3, were omitted.

The resolution may be invalid as an authorization for the expenditure of money, but is not necessarily invalid as an authority to investigate.

The investigation contemplated by the resolution might be had…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Counselman v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Brown v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  3. State v. . AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  4. San Antonio Street Railway Co. v. MuthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
  5. Kraus v. Sentinel Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1885

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

Powered by the Exa API