Fuldauer v. City of Cleveland
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Corrigan, J..
The issues presented are cognate to the constitutionality of the two charter provisions before us.
As urged by appellant, they are divided into five propositions of law.
I
It is first asserted that:
‘ ‘ The enactment of municipal charter provisions which permanently destroy the right of franchise or self-determination of a minority, either directly or through its legally elected representatives, and prohibits a voice in the enactment of legislation concerning vital governmental functions, necessary for the maintenance and continuance of its municipal government, destroys the basic…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kugler v. YocumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- City of Cincinnati v. CorrellOhio Supreme Court · 1943
- State Ex Rel. Hackley v. EdmondsOhio Supreme Court · 1948
- State Ex Rel. Gordon v. BarthalowOhio Supreme Court · 1948
- City of Cleveland ex rel. Neelon v. LocherOhio Supreme Court · 1971
3Cited by35 opinions
- City of Rocky River v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- Malone v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- State ex rel. Cater v. City of North OlmstedOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Jackson v. KurtzOhio Court of Appeals · 1979
- Walton v. Montgomery County Welfare DepartmentOhio Supreme Court · 1982
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.