Pace v. Village of Walton Hills

238 N.E.2d 542, 15 Ohio St. 2d 51, 44 Ohio Op. 2d 29, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 369
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 19, 1968·No. No. 40634·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The absolute prohibition of the use of political signs is unconstitutional. Peltz v. South Euclid, 11 Ohio St. 2d 128. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and judgment is entered for appellant that ordinance No. 1951-3 of the village of Walton Hills, to the extent that it prohibits the use of political signs in residential districts, violates Section 11, Article I of the Constitution of Ohio, and the First and. Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States, and appellees are permanently enjoined from enforcing the ordinance to the extent of its constitutional infirmity as herein indicated.

Judgment reversed.

Matthias, Herbert, Schneider and Brown, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pace v. Village of Walton Hills, 238 N.E.2d 542, 15 Ohio St. 2d 51, 44 Ohio Op. 2d 29, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 369 (Ohio 1968).

238 N.E.2d 542 (Pace v. Village of Walton Hills) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Euclid v. Mabel
484 N.E.2d 249 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1984)
Township of Kidder v. Steinbronn
19 Pa. D. & C.3d 333 (Carbon County Court of Common Pleas, 1981)
Mari Bras v. Warden of the Municipal Jail of San Juan
100 P.R. 504 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1972)
Mari Bras v. Alcaide Cárcel Municipal de San Juan
100 P.R. Dec. 506 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1972)
People v. Lou Bern Broadway, Inc.
68 Misc. 2d 112 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 1971)