State ex rel. Behm v. Wolfert

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Behm v. Wolfert

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 454, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 323

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMay 5, 1924

DocketNo. 18557

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 454 (State ex rel. Behm v. Wolfert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Behm v. Wolfert, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 454, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 323 (Ohio 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

The contentions of the plaintiff are that a general zoning ordinance of the city of Toledo is a valid enactment under' the police power and that defendants should he enjoined from violating the zoning ordinance even if the effect is substantial confiscation of their property; that the modern trend and the weight of authority in the United States sustain the validity of zoning ordinances which are regulations designed to promote the public convenience “shall ever be held subservient to the public welfare.”

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

The contentions of the plaintiff are that a general zoning ordinance of the city of Toledo is a valid enactment under' the police power and that defendants should he enjoined from violating the zoning ordinance even if the effect is substantial confiscation of their property; that the modern trend and the weight of authority in the United States sustain the validity of zoning ordinances which are regulations designed to promote the public convenience “shall ever be held subservient to the public welfare.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 454, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-behm-v-wolfert-ohio-1924.