88 N.E.2d 701 (Ohio 1949), 31770, Reed v. County Bd. of Revision of Fairfield County

Citation: 88 N.E.2d 701, 152 Ohio St. 207

Opinion Judge: TAFT, J.

Party Name: REED v. COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY et al. HOWELL v. COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY et al.

Attorney: Butler, Summer & Hoffman, Columbus, for appellants., James S. Peterson, Prosecuting Attorney, Lancaster and Aubrey A. Wendt, Columbus, for appellees. Messrs. Butler, Summer & Hoffman, for appellants. Mr. James S. Peterson, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. Aubrey A. Wendt, for appellees.

Judge Panel: WEYGANDT, C. J., and MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, STEWART and TURNER, JJ., concur.

Case Date: Wednesday November 09, 1949

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

88 N.E.2d 701 (Ohio 1949), 31770, Reed v. County Bd. of Revision of Fairfield County

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

Ohio - 54 N.E.2d 656 (Ohio 1944), 29504, City of Toledo v. Jenkins
Ohio - 60 N.E.2d 170 (Ohio 1945), 30073, Zangerle v. Republic Steel Corp.
Ohio - 60 N.E.2d 52 (Ohio 1945), 30071, Zangerle v. Standard Oil Co. of Ohio
Ohio - 60 N.E.2d 59 (Ohio 1945), 30072, Standard Oil Co. v. Zangerle
Ohio - 77 N.E.2d 608 (Ohio 1948), 30992, Roseville Pottery v. Board of Revision of Muskingum County

See all quotations