Case ID: ohio-cir-dec_10/html/0751-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Swing, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
    [Hamilton Circuit Court,
    October, 1899.]
    Smith, Swing, and Giffeu, JJ.
    Cincinnati (City) v. Charles P. Taft et al.
    The Act of April 25,1898, is Constitutional and Valid.
    The act of April 25, 1898, giving authority to extend bonds issued under the act of May, 1869, is constitutional. Rule of stare decisis applied, all questions having been passed upon by Supreme Court.
    This was an action brought by the city of Cincinnati to enjoin the board of sinking fund trustees and the trustees of the Cincinnati Southern Railway from proceeding under the statutes to extend the time or payment of the outstanding bonds issued under the act of May, 1.869, entitled “An act relating to cities of the first class having a population exceeding 15,000 inhabitants.” Authority to extend these bonds is found in the supplementary act of April 25, 1898, the constitutionality whereof was attacked in the present suit. In the court below Judge Davis sustained a general demurrer to the petition and dismissed the suit.
    Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county.
   Swing, J.

In our opinion the demurrer to the petition sheuld be sustained for the reason that the questions here presented have all been passed upon by the Supreme Court of the state in the cases involving the constitutionality of the act under which the Cincinnati Southern Railway was built and the different acts supplemental thereto. All these acts have been held by that court to be constitutional. We see nothing in this act which involves any constitutional question not involved in those passed upon by the Supreme Court. Any discussion of this question in this court would therefore seem not only to be fruitless, but out of place. The rule of stare ''decisis appliés.

Ellis G. Kinkead and Wade Ellis, for the city.

W. M. Kemper and Alfred C. Cassatt, for the taxpayer.

E. A. Ferguson, J. R. Sayler and W. T. Porter, for the defendants*