City of Cleveland v. Lausche
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Ey SKEEL, J.
The City of Cleveland has for a great many years maintained' and operated a Zoological Garden, first in Wade Park and then, of late years, in Brookside Park. The purpose of a Zoological Garden is cultural and educational, and is an activity which a municipality clearly has a legal right to own and to operate.
The city, on April 24, 1940, through its council, passed a resolution directing the mayor’s advisory committee and the committee on parks and public property of the city council to study the-feasibility of entering into negotiations with the Cleveland Mu • seum of…
2Cited by12 opinions
- City of Kenai v. Friends of the Recreation Center, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2006
- Persons v. City of Fort WorthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1990
- City of Tulsa v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954
- Yellow Cab of Cleveland, Inc. v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit AuthorityOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
- Hiller v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.