Fulton R.R. Co. v. City of Cincinnati
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Miller, Judge.
{¶ 1} We affirm the trial court's reluctant determination that the residential zoning designation placed on riverfront land near downtown Cincinnati, presently and historically used for industrial purposes, is constitutional. The city is empowered to zone property in an effort to change the character of a neighborhood. Appellants did not meet their high burden of establishing that the zoning applied to their property is unconstitutional. Nor did they establish a total regulatory taking, i.e., that the zoning deprived the owner of all economically viable uses of the land,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Eastley v. VolkmanOhio Supreme Court · 2012
- Lingle v. Chevron U. S. A. Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance v. Guman Bros. FarmOhio Supreme Court · 1995
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.