Price v. Methodist Episcopal Church
Ohio Supreme Court
The bill states that a number of individuals, in Cincinnati, associated themselves together, as Methodists; and in 1807 purchased lots of ground, in Cincinnati, for the accommodation and convenience of themselves and others, for a place of worship and burial; and shortly after-the purchase, at their joint expense, erected a place of worship, and opened a burial place, in which the members of the society had liberty to bury their dead, free of expense; and others had leave,…
Read the full summary
The bill states that a number of individuals, in Cincinnati, associated themselves together, as Methodists; and in 1807 purchased lots of ground, in Cincinnati, for the accommodation and convenience of themselves and others, for a place of worship and burial; and shortly after-the purchase, at their joint expense, erected a place of worship, and opened a burial place, in which the members of the society had liberty to bury their dead, free of expense; and others had leave, also, to bury their dead there, on paying certain burying fees to the trustees of said society; and that from thence,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court, by
Judge Wrigiit :
The complainants rest their claim in argument upon the following grounds:
1. That as purchasers of the privilege of burying in the yard, they thereby acquired a right to the exclusive use, each of a portion of the soil.
2. That this ground has been dedicated to public and pious uses, as a burying yard, and that the disturbing the repose of the dead is a public nuisance, shocking to the best moral and religious feelings of community, which can not be remedied by ordinary legal process.
A.s to the first point. We are unable to perceive how the complainants…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- TERRETT & OTHERS v. Taylor & OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1815
- Beatty and Ritchie v. Kurtz and OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
- The Town of Pawlet v. D. CLARK & OTHERSSupreme Court of the United States · 1815
- Green v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Mason v. MuncasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Gladon v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Auth.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
- Butler v. JordanOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Fankhauser v. City of MansfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1969
- Green v. Borough of ReadingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Gillison v. City of CharlestonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1880
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.