Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Spencer v. East Liverpool Planning Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1997No. 97-555PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Per curiam

Spencer asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of appeals erred in granting the planning commission’s motion for summary judgment and denying the requested writ of mandamus. Before summary judgment may be granted, it must be determined that (1) no genuine issue as to any material fact remains to be litigated, (2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and (3) it appears from the evidence that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion, and viewing the evidence most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, that conclusion is adverse to the party…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Mootispaw v. EcksteinOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga County BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Jackson v. Alert Fire & Safety Equipment, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. State ex rel. V Companies v. MarshallOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State ex rel. The V Cos. v. MarshallOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State Ex Rel. Gilmour Realty, Inc. v. City of Mayfield HeightsOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State ex rel. Ascani v. Stark County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State ex rel. Ohio Department of Mental Health v. NadelOhio Supreme Court · 2003

41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API