Hortman v. City of Miamisburg
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.
*195{¶ 1} Today this court must decide whether the doctrines of equitable estoppel and promissory estoppel are applicable against a political subdivision when the political subdivision is engaged in the performance of a government function. For the reasons that follow, we hold that they are not, and we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and enter judgment for the city of Miamisburg.
I. Facts
{¶ 2} This dispute arose from a road-improvement project by the appellant, the city of Miamisburg, involving Maue Road and a portion of South Linden Avenue at the point where it intersected with Maue.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Dickerson v. ColgroveSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Cater v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Ohio State Board of Pharmacy v. FrantzOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Sun Refining & Marketing Co. v. BrennanOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- Besl Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1976
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by95 opinions
- Rankin v. Cuyahoga County Department of Children & Family ServicesOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- AtriCure, Inc. v. Jian MengCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. RyanOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Matthews v. Chicago Transit AuthorityIllinois Supreme Court · 2016
- Camp St. Mary's Ass'n of the West Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church, Inc. v. Otterbein HomesOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.