Legal Opinion

Fischer v. City of Cleveland

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 8, 1931PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

“Thomas M. Kennedy, J.

This cause is an injunction proceeding brought by a taxpayer, and the original caption of “State of Ohio on the relation of, etc.” is therefore a mistake. The caption above used will be substituted for the former one.

This cause came on for hearing and was submitted on the pleadings and the evidence, and the court being fully advised in the premises, on the request of plaintiff that separate findings of fact and conclusions of law be made, finds the facts as follows:

1. The plaintiff is a taxpayer of the city of Cleveland, Ohio, and made a demand upon the Director of Law…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Meyer v. City of ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. Village of Newburgh Heights v. TeggOhio Court of Appeals · 1929

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City of Columbus Ex Rel. Willits v. CremeanOhio Court of Appeals · 1971
  2. Zetzer v. LundgardOhio Court of Appeals · 1953
  3. State Ex Rel. Masterson v. Ohio State Racing CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1954
  4. Board of Commrs. v. Mentor Lagoons, Inc.Lake County Court of Common Pleas · 1965
  5. De’Joir Stokes v. City Dogs Animal ControlDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2026

1 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