Legal Opinion

Hardy v. Horst

Summit County Court of Common Pleas

Decided April 11, 1951No. 177610PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By WATTERS, J.

This matter comes before the court under the provisions, of §3180-39 GC, which in part and in substance provides:

“Any person adversely affected by a decision of a township board of zoning appeals may appeal to the Court of Common Pleas * * * on the ground that such decision was unreasonable or unlawful. The court may affirm, reverse or modify the decision complained of in the appeal.”

The statutes covering Township Zoning are §3180-26 to §3180-50 GC, both inclusive.

Sec. 3180-26 GC declares that the purpose of the legislature is “promoting public health, safety, morals or…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. A. Dicillo & Sons, Inc. v. Chester Zoning Board of AppealsGeauga County Court of Common Pleas · 1950

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Kahler-Ellis Co. v. ClineLucas County Court of Common Pleas · 1954
  2. Wright v. BayowskiOhio Court of Appeals · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API