Legal Opinion

City of Parma v. City of Cleveland

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1984No. 83-438PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The present controversy centers around the uncertainty which exists with reference to the overall area included within the regional sewer district. Resolution of the issue depends upon interpretation of the district’s charter itself. For the reasons which follow, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals. *111R.C. 6119.02(E) requires that a petition seeking to create a regional sewer district contain “* * * an accurate description * * * of the territory to be organized as a district * * V’1 The suburbs contend, and the trial court so concluded, that the description contained in Section 6(a)…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Appeal of Smith v. Chester Township Board of TrusteesOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Klick v. SnavelyOhio Supreme Court · 1928
  3. State ex rel. Berry v. TackettOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  4. State ex rel. Mikus v. ChaplaOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  5. State ex rel. Smith v. OcasekOhio Supreme Court · 1976

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Carlson v. RabkinOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. Levinsky v. Boardman Twp. Civ. Serv Comm., Unpublished Decision (10-29-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. Steiniger v. Butler Cty. Bd. of Commrs.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. State ex rel. Branch v. Pitts, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County2018
  5. State ex rel. Layshock v. MooreheadOhio Court of Appeals · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API