State ex rel. Spiccia v. Abate
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
What constitutes a ‘ ‘ restaurant ” or a “ drive-in restaurant” is not otherwise defined in the zoning ordinance, hence whether the proposed use constitutes one or the other *130was determined by considering the common and ordinary meaning of those terms. This was proper. Since the ordinance is a police regulation and imposes restrictions upon the use of property, the language defining a permitted use is required to be liberally construed in favor of permitting the use proposed by the property owner.
‘‘ Statutes or ordinances * * # which impose restrictions upon the use * * * of private property,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State Ex Rel. Ice & Fuel Co. v. KreuzweiserOhio Supreme Court · 1929
3Cited by22 opinions
- State ex rel. Sibarco Corp. v. City of BereaOhio Supreme Court · 1966
- Ben Lomond, Inc. v. City of Idaho FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1968
- Van Camp v. RileyOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
- Elbert v. Bexley Planning CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
- Freedom Township Board of Zoning Appeals v. Portage County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental DisabilitiesOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.