Legal Opinion

Westbrook v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1988No. 87-435PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

The present action seeks to invalidate the tax abatement afforded appellant ENCURC by virtue of its financial agreement with the city. Through this effort, appellee endeavors to prevent ENCURC from deriving future tax benefits under the agreement and to recover any benefits realized since June 30,1977. In his initial complaint, appellee alleged that the action was brought “pursuant to statutes relating to taxpayers' actions.” This allegation was omitted from the amended complaint, the dismissal of which is the subject of the instant appeal. While appellee was correct in arguing below that,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Himebaugh v. City of CantonOhio Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Dehmer v. CampbellOhio Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Graham v. City of Lakewood, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County2018
  2. City of Cuyahoga Falls v. RobartOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Jenkins v. EberhartOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Mollette v. Portsmouth City CouncilOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. City of Berea Ex Rel. Ward v. TrupoOhio Court of Appeals · 2001

2 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