Legal Opinion

City of Lancaster v. Fairfield County Budget Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 1999No. 98-1059PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

This appeal presents two legal issues: (1) whether, pursuant to R.C. 5747.53 and 5747.63, the budget commission must secure annual approvals from all the participants in order to allocate the ULGF and the ULGRAF pursuant to the alternative formulas, and (2) whether the budget commission must secure approval from all participants for succeeding years if one of the participants in these funds initially limited its approval, of the alternative formulas to one year, but thereafter approved use of an alternative formula without *140limiting it to a specific time period. We answer both of these…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. City of Girard v. Trumbull County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Township of Andover v. Ashtabula County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1977

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. City of East Liverpool v. Columbiana County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Lancaster v. Fairfield Cty. Budget Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. City of East Liverpool v. Columbiana County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. City of Reynoldsburg v. Licking County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. E. Liverpool v. Columbiana Cty. Budget Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 2000

3 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