Legal Opinion

City of Oregon v. Dansack

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 1993No. 92-2446PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

We grant respondent’s motion for summary judgment and deny the writ for the following reasons.

I

Authority to Adopt the Ordinance

Relator alleges that city council has authority under the city charter to approve contracts, and the mayor has the duty to execute them. Respondent argues that he has the authority under the charter to “evaluate and discipline” members of the police department and that the proposed contract is an attempt by council to exert authority in this area in which it has no power.

Section 8, Article III of the Charter of the city of Oregon states in part:

“The Council shall have…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Trumbull County Board of Education v. State Ex Rel. Van WyeOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  2. State ex rel. Holloway v. RhodesOhio Court of Appeals · 1940

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hamilton CountyOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hamilton Cty.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Newton v. Court of ClaimsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. Hillyer v. Tuscarawas Cty. Bd. of Commrs.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State ex rel. Wilson v. SunderlandOhio Supreme Court · 2000

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

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

Powered by the Exa API