Perrysburg Twp. v. Rossford

785 N.E.2d 471, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1488
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 19, 2003·No. 2002-2025·Published

Opinion

Wood App. Nos. WD-02-010 and WD-02-011, 149 Ohio App.3d 645, 2002-Ohio-5498, and 2002-Ohio-6364. Discretionary appeal allowed on Proposition of Law No. I.

Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs but would also allow Proposition of Law No. II. Cooic, J., concurs but would allow all propositions of law. F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent. Resnicic, J., not participating.

Discretionary cross-appeal allowed on Proposition of Law No. I.

Moyer, C. J., and Cook, J., concur but would allow all propositions of law. F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent. Resnicic, J., not participating.

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

Perrysburg Twp. v. Rossford, 785 N.E.2d 471, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1488 (Ohio 2003).

785 N.E.2d 471 (Perrysburg Twp. v. Rossford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Perrysburg Township v. City of Rossford
778 N.E.2d 619 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2002)