Legal Opinion

Thomas v. City of Cleveland

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 10, 2000No. 75005 and 75006PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

John T. Patton, Presiding Judge.

Ohio law permits the forfeiture of contraband used in connection with certain criminal offenses, regardless whether the owner of the contraband participated in the criminal offense. The issue in this appeal and cross-appeal is whether the city of Cleveland’s seizure procedures violate due process by failing to afford innocent owners of property sufficient notice of seizure and speedy disposition of their property.

The relevant facts have been stipulated, though we stress the stipulations referred to are those entered into only between the city and plaintiffs,…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Thomas v. City of ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. Thernes v. United Local Sch. Bd. Dist. of Edn., 07 Co 45 (12-17-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. State ex rel. Stone v. NormanOhio Court of Appeals · 2024
  4. 2115-2121 Ontario Bldg., L.L.C. v. AnterOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Dept. of Pub. Safety v. Buckley, 2006-L-101 (9-7-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

1 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