Village of Willoughby Hills v. Corrigan
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLeach, J.
The basic question presented by this appeal is whether R. C. Chapter 4563 is unconstitutional on its face.
In essence, such was the conclusion of the Court of Appeals. Such conclusion apparently is based upon the rationale that all “airport zoning regulations” adopted pursuant to the authority of R. C. 4563.03 necessarily result in an unconstitutional “taking” of private property without compensation, and that such would be true even in those cases where such “taking” resulted in no diminution of property value, and where, so far as airspace is concerned, there is no showing as to the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United States v. CausbySupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Griggs v. Allegheny CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Ackerman v. Port of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1960
- Pritz v. MesserOhio Supreme Court · 1925
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Richard Silver Silver Construction Company v. Franklin Township, Board of Zoning AppealsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992
- Chance v. BP Chemicals, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
- McCarran International Airport v. SisolakNevada Supreme Court · 2006
- Board of County Commissioners v. Park County Sportsmen's Ranch, LLPSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
- Kramer v. Angel's Path, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.