Legal Opinion

Goldberg Cos., Inc. v. Richmond Hts. City Council

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1998No. 1996-0084PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 81 Ohio St.3d 207.] GOLDBERG COMPANIES, INC., APPELLANT, v. COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND HEIGHTS, APPELLEE. [Cite as Goldberg Cos., Inc. v. Richmond Hts. City Council,

1998-Ohio-456.] Municipal corporations—Zoning—Zoning regulation presumed to be constitutional, when—No distinction between area and use regulations in terms of standard for a constitutional challenge. A zoning regulation is presumed to be constitutional unless determined by a court to be clearly arbitrary and unreasonable and without substantial relation to the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Nectow v. City of CambridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  5. Karches v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1988

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Shelly Materials, Inc. v. Clark County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  2. State ex rel. Shemo v. Mayfield Hts.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State ex rel. Shemo v. Mayfield Hts.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State ex rel. BSW Dev. Group v. DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Shemo v. Mayfield Hts.Ohio Supreme Court · 2000

15 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