Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Steubenville Ice Co. v. Merrell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1934No. 24354PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWeygandt, C. J.

The respondents contend that claims against the state of Ohio bear no interest in the absence of specific provision therefor, and that Section 8305, General Code, contains no clause relating to awards resulting from an exercise of the power of eminent domain.

The relator concedes the general correctness of these views, but asserts that the question in the instant case is controlled by Article I, Section 19, of the Constitution of Ohio, rather than by statute.

The pertinent language of the Constitution is as follows: “Where private property shall be taken for public use, a compensation therefor…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Jacobs v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. State v. JonesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Yancey v. North Carolina State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  2. Arkansas-Missouri Power Company v. HamlinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956
  3. Bekos v. MasheterOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Hammond v. State Roads CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
  5. In Re Petition of State Highway Com'r.Michigan Supreme Court · 1937

9 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