Legal Opinion · Dissent

Zangara v. Chester Twp. Trustees

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 3, 1991No. 90-G-1581Published

1DissentChristley, J.

Christley, Judge.

I respectfully dissent.

The problem with this case is the interpretation of the Ohio Supreme Court cases, Kisil v. Sandusky (1984), 12 Ohio St.3d 30, 12 OBR 26, 465 N.E.2d 848, and Duncan v. Middlefield (1986), 23 Ohio St.3d 83, 23 OBR 212, 491 N.E.2d 692.

Those cases stand for the proposition that an applicant for an area variance need only show practical difficulty rather than unnecessary hardship. The difficulty in applying those cases to the instant fact situation is that those two cases did not argue or distinguish between a municipal zoning board as opposed to a township…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kisil v. City of SanduskyOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Duncan v. Village of MiddlefieldOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Peterson v. Washington Court Athletic ClubOhio Court of Appeals · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API