Legal Opinion
Lamneck v. Cain
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided November 16, 1955No. Nos. 5334, 5349, 5361PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By THE COURT.
The same legal questions are presented in each of the above appeals, so they will be considered together.
The appellee has filed motions in each of the above cases seeking an order dismissing the appeal for the following reasons:
1. The Court is without jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
2. The issues involved have become moot.
The record reveals that the actions herein were instituted in the Common Pleas Court and sought orders restraining the respondent who is the Clerk for the City of Columbus, Ohio, from certifying to the Council of said city the action taken by the Franklin…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Hinfey v. Matawan Regional Board of EducationSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
- State ex rel. Board of Trustees v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Hinfey v. Matawan Regional Board of EducationNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977
- Crandall v. CainOhio Court of Appeals · 1956
- Hicks v. Cain, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1957
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.