Legal Opinion

City of Dayton v. State

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 18, 2004No. 20120PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Brogan, Judge.

I. Factual Background

{¶ 1} In July 2001, the city of Dayton passed Ordinance No. 29990-01, which prohibits predatory lending practices in Dayton, restricts the ability of predatory lenders to transact business with Dayton, and allows injured parties to bring civil actions to void or correct predatory loans. The ordinance was codified as Sections 112.40 through 112.44 of the Revised Code of General Ordinances of the City of Dayton (“R.C.G.O.”).

{¶ 2} Subsequently, the Ohio General Assembly passed legislation on the same subject. Amended Substitute H.B. 386 enacted new sections of…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. ShewardOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. City of Rocky River v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Whaley v. Franklin County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. State ex rel. Evans v. MooreOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Canton v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. American Financial Services Ass'n v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. City of Cleveland v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  3. City of Lima v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. American Financial Services Ass'n v. City of ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 2004
  5. City of Cincinnati v. BaskinOhio Court of Appeals · 2004

7 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