Legal Opinion

Huber v. Cardiff

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided July 10, 2009No. 08-CA-24PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Brogan, Judge.

{¶ 1} In August 2006, Carl Huber filed an application with the city of Piqua, Ohio, for a special-use permit to operate an automobile repair shop on his property at 715 South Roosevelt Avenue. The property at the time was zoned for residential use, but Huber was seeking to expand his nonconforming use of the property. Since Huber intended to build a new building on the property, the city of Piqua required a site plan, and thus a site survey was performed. The survey revealed that a small strip of property inside the fence separating the Roosevelt property from the property at…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Grace v. KochOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Evanich v. BridgeOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Wood v. NelsonWashington Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Martin v. KozuszekNebraska Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bennett v. PetersOhio Court of Appeals · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API