Legal Opinion
City of Springfield v. Gross
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided October 14, 2005No. 2004-CA-81PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Fain, Judge.
{¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant, the city of Springfield, Ohio, appeals from a judgment of the Clark County Court of Common Pleas dismissing an action to appropriate the property of defendants-appellees, Donald and Carol Gross. The city contends that the trial court erred in finding that the Springfield City Commission abused its discretion in determining the amount of the Grosses’ property needed by the city to construct a sewer lift station.
{¶ 2} We conclude from the record that the city does not intend to use the entire 0.677 acres of the Grosses’ property for the stated public…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Cincinnati v. VesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- City of Cincinnati v. Vester. Same v. Richards Same v. ReakirtSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- City of East Cleveland v. NauOhio Supreme Court · 1931
- City of Mentor v. OsborneOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
3Cited by5 opinions
- Village of Octa v. Octa Retail, Ca2007-04-015 (9-8-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- Columbia Gas v. BaileyOhio Court of Appeals · 2023
- Columbia Gas v. Phelps Preferred Invests., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2022
- Atwood Regional Water & Sewer Dist. v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- City of Dublin v. BeatleyOhio Court of Appeals · 2018