Willott v. Beachwood Village
Ohio Court of Appeals
1DissentHurd, J.
It should be clearly stated and emphasized that the property here involved is essentially and peculiarly adapted for a shopping center because it is an expensive tract of eighty acres of undeveloped land bounded by four main highways which effectively divide it from surrounding-property.
This eighty acre tract is bounded by Ohio State Boute No. 1, a four hundred foot highway on the east; by Shaker Boulevard, a divided highway occupied by two sixty foot road highways and a four hundred foot center strip, on the north; Bichmond Boad or as it is sometimes known, State Highway Boute No. 175, one…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Pecora v. Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
- Page Et Ux. v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Root v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Clifton Hills Realty Co. v. CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1938
- Cleveland Trust Co. v. Village of BrooklynOhio Court of Appeals · 1952
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.