Legal Opinion

Solether v. Ohio Turnpike Commission

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided January 18, 1954No. 790PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFess, P. J.

Defendant’s demurrer to the petition on the ground that the facts therein stated do not constitute a cause of action was sustained and the petition was dismissed. Plaintiff appeals on questions of law.

The petition alleges that the defendant seeks to appropriate “all rights to erect on any of the aforesaid remaining lands any billboard, sign, notice, poster, or other advertising device, which would be visible from the travelway of Ohio Turnpike-Project No. 1, and which is not now upon said lands.”

Plaintiff alleges further “that the same is not a necessary part, or required in, the…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
  2. Lynch v. ForbesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  3. Commissioners of Parks & Boulevards v. MoestaMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  4. State Ex Rel. Allen v. FergusonOhio Supreme Court · 1951
  5. State Ex Rel. Kauer v. DefenbacherOhio Supreme Court · 1950

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Latchis v. State Highway BoardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1957
  2. Sunoco Pipeline L.P. v. TeterOhio Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. Pepper Pike v. HirschauerOhio Court of Appeals · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API