Legal Opinion
Burke v. Cincinnati
Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County
Decided December 11, 1929PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtDarby, J.
The plaintiff in error was prosecuted in the Municipal Court of Cincinnati, for the violation of an ordinance of the city, which forbids the parking of automobiles within a certain distance of fire plugs. The sufficiency of the affidavit was not questioned, and does not seem to be open to question.
In Murphy v. City, 108 O. S., 342, and other cases decided by the Supreme Court, it was held:
“1. Municipalities have full power to regulate or control the use of their own streets.”
The ordinance is in the interest of public safety and fire protection, and must be held to be a reasonable regulation.
Th…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Dillon v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- Albert v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1922
- Faraone v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
- State v. . EmerySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- United States v. TurnerDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- City of Columbus v. WebsterOhio Court of Appeals · 1958