Ink v. City of Canton

Plaintiffs contend that acts of the city before the appropriation proceedings breached the conditions of the *54deeds and caused a reverter of all or at least part of the Ink Park property at that time. There is no basis for snch a contention on the facts as found by the Court of Appeals. We are satisfied that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support those findings of fact.

Plaintiffs’ other contentions raise questions as to the effect of the state’s appropriation of a substantial part of the Ink Park property on the respective rights of the city and of the plaintiffs to (1) the…