Legal Opinion
Smith v. Denihan
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided June 28, 1990No. Case 89AP-623PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtReilly, P.J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Franklin County Common Pleas Court declaring a provision of Am. Sub. S.B. No. 1 unconstitutional under the Contract Clause of both the United States and Ohio constitutions
Defendants advance the following assignments of error:
"1.) The trial court erred in determining the deputy registrar plaintiffs had a contract with the state defendants after November 28,1988, which granted the plaintiffs a $1.50 per transaction from January 1,1989 to June 30,1989.
"2.) The trial court erred in finding the pertinent provisions of Am. Sub. S.B. No. 1 void as…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Dodge v. Board of Ed. of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kaufman v. ByersOhio Court of Appeals · 2004
- Shimko v. LobeOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
- Fifth Third Bank of Columbus v. McCloudOhio Court of Appeals · 1993