Legal Opinion
State v. Footlick
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided June 2, 1965No. 38978PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrowN, J.
The question upon which this cause was certified to this court has meanwhile been determined adversely to the position taken by the Court of Appeals for Wayne County, in the case of State v. Maynard (decided December 29, 1964), 1 Ohio St. 2d 57, in which the syllabus reads:
“The arrest and prosecution of a person for violation of Section 3773.24, Revised Code (Sunday Closing Law), can be caused by two methods: (1) by filing an affidavit with a judge or clerk of a court of record or with a magistrate and (2) by filing an affidavit with the prosecuting attorney or attorney charged by law with…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Couk v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1941
- State v. Fantastic Fair & Karmil Merchandising Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1961
- State v. Karmil Merchandising Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1962
- Penniston v. City of NewnanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Pettibone v. McKinnonOhio Supreme Court · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. BurnetteOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
- State v. LaytonOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
- City of Cleveland Heights v. GulkoOhio Court of Appeals · 1970