State ex rel. Hickenlooper v. Beaman

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Hickenlooper v. Beaman

105 Ohio St. (N.S.) 652

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided July 11, 1922·No. Nos. 17433 to 17439·Published

Opinion

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the same hereby are affirmed; this court being unanijudgments of the said court of appeals he, and the [653]*653mously of the opinion and finding that the statute involved in these eases has no application to the facts here involved because of the provisions of Section 20, Article II, of the Constitution of Ohio.

Judgments affirmed.

Marshall, C. J., Johnson, Hough, Wanamaker, Robinson, Jones and Matthias, JJ., concur.

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

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the same hereby are affirmed; this court being unanijudgments of the said court of appeals he, and the [653]*653mously of the opinion and finding that the statute involved in these eases has no application to the facts here involved because of the provisions of Section 20, Article II, of the Constitution of Ohio.

Judgments affirmed.

Marshall, C. J., Johnson, Hough, Wanamaker, Robinson, Jones and Matthias, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. Hickenlooper v. Beaman, 105 Ohio St. (N.S.) 652 (Ohio 1922).

Pincite

105 Ohio St. (N.S.) 652 (State ex rel. Hickenlooper v. Beaman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.