State Ex Rel. Buckman v. Munson
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.
Counsel for the respondent contend that necessary retrenchment in expenditure of public funds is a justifiable ground for laying off an officer or employee in the classified service of a municipality, -and therefore the disclosure in the petition that the layoff complained of was for reasons of economy •renders the petition vulnerable to a demurrer on the .-ground that the facts stated therein are insufficient to constitute a cause of action.
Counsel for the relator contend that the position held by the relator, having been established by an -ordinance of the city of Cleveland pursuant to and…
2Cited by19 opinions
- State ex rel. Bardo v. City of LyndhurstOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Gannon v. PerkOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- State ex rel. Sigall v. Aetna Cleaning Contractors of Cleveland, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1976
- City of Cincinnati Ex Rel. Simons v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
- State Ex Rel. Hartnett v. ZellerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.