Case ID: ohio-st-3d_105/html/1496-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

2005-0161.
    Am. Financial Serv. Assn. v. Cleveland.
   Cuyahoga App. No. 83676, 2004-Ohio-6416. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issues stated in the court of appeals’ Journal Entry filed January 11, 2005:

‘Whether R.C. 1.63 is a general law for purposes of Ohio’s Home Rule Amendment.

“Under a home rule analysis, whether local predatory lending ordinances that impose stricter requirements on lending transactions conflict with the state’s predatory lending statutes.”

Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 2005-0160, Am. Financial Serv. Assn., Cuyahoga App. No. 83676, 2004-Ohio-6416.

The conflict case is Dayton v. State, 157 Ohio App.3d 736, 2004-Ohio-3141, 813 N.E.2d 707.