Legal Opinion

Personal Service Insurance v. Mamone

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 1986No. 84-1875PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

The determinative issue in this appeal is whether the proposed civil penalty assessment issued by appellant Mamone constitutes an unconstitutional impairment of PSI’s surety contract which was executed prior to the effective date of R.C. 1513.02(F)(1). For the reasons that follow, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals which held that the proposed civil penalty assessment was unconstitutional as applied to PSI.

Appellee PSI argues that the proposed civil penalty assessment against it for violating reclamation standards amounts to an unconstitutional retroactive impairment of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lakengren, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State v. TipkaOhio Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Harris v. Van HooseOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. In Re Citizens Utilities Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2000
  3. City of Akron v. KirbyOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. State v. BakerClark County Municipal Court · 1995
  5. Sigler v. State, 08-Ca-79 (4-27-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009

2 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