Legal Opinion
Mell v. State Ex Rel. Fritz
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 19, 1935No. 25627PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
The sole question presented for our determination is whether the board has the power to reduce or increase pensions of those already receiving them.
The Court of Appeals of Summit county denied the existence of such right and cited in support of its position Holmes et al., Trustees, v. State, ex rel. Delaney, 93 Ohio St., 480, 113 N. E., 1070; State, ex rel. Dieckroegger, v. Connors, 122 Ohio St., 359, at page 366, 171 N. E., 586; and State, ex rel. Eden, v. Kundts et al., Trustees, 127 Ohio St., 276, 188 N. E., 9. However, we do not deem the above cases authority for the determination of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lynch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Frisbie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Pennie v. ReisSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- United States v. TellerSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Walton v. CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 1857
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Phillip v. Public School Retirement SystemSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953
- Driggs v. Utah Teachers Retirement BoardUtah Supreme Court · 1943
- Talbott v. Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
- State ex rel. Horvath v. State Teachers Retirement BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Board of Trustees v. People Ex Rel. BehrmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1949
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.