Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Kohl v. Dunipace

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1978No. 78-770PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue before this court is whether the respondent has a right to the office of city solicitor by virtue of the requirement in R. C. 733.49 that a. “city solicitor” be “an elector of the (same) city,” which respondent admittedly is not. (Parenthetical material added.)

Respondent argues that Section 3, Article XVIII of the Constitution of Ohio, authorizes municipalities to establish requirements for its officers different from those set forth by statute, in which case respondent’s office would be governed by the charter of Perrysburg rather than by R. C. 733.49.

Section 3 of Article XVIII…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Paluf v. FeneliOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State, Ex Rel. Corrigan v. BarnesOhio Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. City of Twinsburg v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Fenton v. EnaharoOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State ex rel. Paluf v. FeneliOhio Supreme Court · 1994

4 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