Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Robert G. Sproul v. City of Wooster

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 26, 1988No. 86-3781Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMerritt, Circuit Judge

I agree with the Court’s resolution of the antitrust and § 1983 issues. I disagree, however, with the Court’s decision on the Ohio contract law issue.

I agree with the majority that the power to approve an extra-territorial expansion of city services vests in the city council ab initio. The facts of this case reveal a legal chain of authority in which power over the water and sewer systems was allocated in a succession of constitutional provisions, state statutes, and city ordinances. Municipalities in Ohio are specifically empowered by article XVIII § 4 of the state constitution to operate…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Indian Hill Acres, Inc. v. KelloggOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Kimbrell v. Village of Seven MileOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Schumacher Stone Co. v. Village of Columbus GroveOhio Court of Appeals · 1944
  4. City of Stow v. City of Cuyahoga FallsOhio Court of Appeals · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API