State ex rel. Fenner v. Hamilton Co.
This text of 11 Ohio Cir. Dec. 317 (State ex rel. Fenner v. Hamilton Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Circuit Courts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We are unable to distinguish this case from the cases of Hixson v. Burnson, 54 Ohio St., 470; State ex rel. v. Davis, 55 Ohio St., 15, and Mott v. Hubbard, 59 Ohio St., 199, and therefore feel bound to hold the act in question unconstitutional. The fact that the law in question does not specifically point out what levee used as a road or bridge approach is to he improved or repaired by the money realized from the sale of bonds, it seems to us can make no difference.- The act still remains local, and the subject of roads and bridge approaches is a matter of a general nature, as decided by the above cases.
Injunction allowed as prayed for.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 Ohio Cir. Dec. 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-fenner-v-hamilton-co-ohiocirct-1900.