Legal Opinion

Fankhauser v. City of Mansfield

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 1969No. Nos. 68-543, 68-544 and 68-545PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.

The nature and extent of the liability of municipal corporations in Ohio has been the subject of extensive comment, both by judges and text-writers. The judicially established rule, which is based upon the traditional doctrine of sovereign immunity, is that a municipality is not liable for damages resulting from the exercise of a governmental function. Damage caused in the exercise of a proprietary function is actionable. However, this distinction has not always been a part of Ohio law. See *105Commrs. of Brown County v. Butt (1826), 2 Ohio 349; Goodloe v. Cincinnati (1831), 4 Ohio 500; Rhodes v.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. City of Wooster v. ArbenzOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Wagshal v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1966
  3. O'HARE v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Tolliver v. City of NewarkOhio Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Yackee v. Village of NapoleonOhio Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Helton v. Scioto County Board of CommissionersOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
  2. Franks v. LopezOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Manufacturer's National Bank v. Erie County Road CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Dickerhoof v. City of CantonOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Royce v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1981

26 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