Legal Opinion
Thompson v. City of Oakwood
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided February 8, 2018No. Case No. 3:16–cv–169PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS M. ROSE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
*766From approximately 1992 until July 2016 (shortly after this lawsuit was filed), a municipal ordinance in the City of Oakwood, Ohio made it unlawful to transfer ownership of any real estate, or change a tenant, without having obtained a "pre-sale inspection" of the property under the municipal code. (Doc. 28-9, Oakwood Codified Ordinances, § 17, at PageID # 3112-3152.) The pre-sale inspection program required the property owner to complete an application, schedule and appear for an inspection of the property with the code official, pay a $60 fee,…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pund v. City of BedfordDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2018
- Crossroads Group, LLC v. Cleveland Heights, OhioDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2024
- Mark Courtney, et al. v. City of Salem, Ohio, et al.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2025
- Metropolitan Omaha Property Owners Association, Inc. v. The City of OmahaDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 2019