Legal Opinion
Karches v. City of Cincinnati
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided July 20, 1988No. 87-830PublishedCited by 219 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.
The appellants have challenged the constitutionality of the zoning of their properties by the city of Cincinnati. We must decide, first, whether the challenge is ripe for determination. If the answer is in the affirmative, we may consider the merits of the constitutional attack.
I
The court of appeals held that the issue of the constitutionality of the RF-1 zoning as applied to the properties of appellants was not ripe for judicial review “* * * because the City had not reached a final decision regarding the application of the zoning regulations to the two tracts.” The court relied upon the…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Seasons Coal Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by219 opinions
- Tewarson v. SimonOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
- Gerijo, Inc. v. City of FairfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Duncan v. City of Mentor City CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 2005
- Community Concerned Citizens, Inc. v. Union Township Board of Zoning AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1993
- Shemo v. Mayfield HeightsOhio Supreme Court · 2000
214 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.