City of Cincinnati v. Thomas Soft Ice Cream, Inc.

Appellant is correct in its contention that the General Assembly may limit the time within which an action may be brought in the courts of this state, even where such action is based upon the alleged violation of a municipal ordinance. In Akron v. Smith (1968), 14 Ohio St. 2d 247, this court held that a municipal ordinance could *78not extend the period of time, within which an income-tax related offense could he prosecuted, beyond the statute of limitations specified by the General Assembly for the prosecution of any offense made punishable by a municipal ordinance. Our holding in Akron is,…