Legal Opinion

Ford Realty & Construction Co. v. Cleveland (City)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 16, 1928No. 8393PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVickery, J.

Under the conditions of this contract we are at a loss to understand what there was to assign. If you take the entire contract with Cleveland, the city was to be put to no expense whatever, and if you take the written offer made by the Ford Co. to West Park, it would be difficult, to see what there was to assign in equity or in law, because there was no right that Roekport (Vil.) or West Park (Vil.), or anybody else had against Cleveland.

Now when Cleveland and West Park made its contract by virtue of which West Park became a part of Cleveland, there was no provision that Cleveland should pay…

2Cited by13 opinions

  1. Hightower v. City of TylerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1939
  2. City of Richmond v. County of HenricoSupreme Court of Virginia · 1946
  3. City of Danville v. Forest Hills Development Corp.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1935
  4. Derby Heights, Inc. v. Gantt Water & Sewer DistrictSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1960
  5. Spaugh v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

8 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