State ex rel. Zsinka v. Cleveland

Ohio Court of Appeals

State ex rel. Zsinka v. Cleveland

176 N.E.2d 331, 87 Ohio Law. Abs. 177, 19 Ohio Op. 2d 41, 1961 Ohio App. LEXIS 803

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 21, 1961

DocketNo. 25036

StatusPublished

This text of 176 N.E.2d 331 (State ex rel. Zsinka v. Cleveland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Zsinka v. Cleveland, 176 N.E.2d 331, 87 Ohio Law. Abs. 177, 19 Ohio Op. 2d 41, 1961 Ohio App. LEXIS 803 (Ohio Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The request for damages pursuant to Section 2731.11, Revised Code, is denied.

A writ of mandamus was issued after trial requiring the City of Cleveland to permit the relator to build a multi-family dwelling, having shown a clear legal right to same.

' Relator now seeks damages claimed to have been incurred by reason of the refusal of the City to issue the permit when the application was presented to the Building Commissioner.

This court unanimously comes to the conclusion that the [178]*178granting or refusing of a municipal license is an act coming within the exercise of the police power of the City and being in the exercise of a governmental function, the municipality is not liable in damages under Section 2731.11, Revised Code, for the wrongful issuance or refusal of a license.

See:

18 McQuillin “Municipal Corporations” 3rd Edition, 237, Section 53.37.

8 Ohio Jurisprudence 2d, 277, Sec. 27.

Ohio, ex rel. Parrott et al, v. Board of Public Works, 36 Ohio St., 409.

James v. Toledo, 24 Ohio App., 268.

Kovachy, P. J., Skeel and Hurd, JJ., concur.

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