Legal Opinion

Franchise Developers, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1987No. 86-513PublishedCited by 96 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

Subsequent to the decision rendered by the court of appeals, it was adduced in oral argument that the theatre property which is the subject of this litigation was obtained by the city of Cincinnati and was then transferred to a non-profit organization which plans to operate the property as a theatre again. Therefore, FDI and Lipson waived oral argument before this court since the issues involved in this cause are moot with respect to their interests. Given this set of circumstances, our first inquiry is whether the instant cause should be dismissed on grounds of mootness.

Upon a careful review…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Village of Hudson v. Albrecht, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Consolidated Management, Inc. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Leslie v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  5. In re PoppOhio Supreme Court · 1973

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

3Cited by96 opinions

  1. State v. Bishop (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  2. State v. ConsilioOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Gerijo, Inc. v. City of FairfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Tschantz v. FergusonOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Pewitt v. Superintendent, Lorain Correctional InstitutionOhio Supreme Court · 1992

91 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