Case ID: ohio-law-abs_5/html/0365-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MATTHIAS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 424
    No. 20457
    State of Ohio ex rel. John D. Ellis, Solicitor of City of Cincinnati, etc., v. Louis B. Blakemore, Clerk of Council of City of Cincinnati, et al.
    In Mandamus.
    801. MUNICIPAL LAW — Where ordinance has received enough votes to enact it as by the record, although it is there erroneously stated that such ordinance failed of passage, it is duty of officer to authenticate and record the same, which may be enforced by mandamus.
    323. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS — Secs. 2421, 6949 and 7557 GC. authorizes county commissioners to construct bridge as part of road improvement and same may be in municipality upon the consent of council; and where the city is to bear none of the expense a majority vote of council is all that is required.
    1104. STATUTES — Neither the charter of Cincinnati nor the provisions of Sec. 4366-2 GC. relative to powers of city planning commission have application to the erection of a bridge or an inter-county on a main market road.
   MATTHIAS, J.

1. Where a municipal ordinance has received sufficient votes of council to duly enact same, and that fact is evidenced by the record of the proceedings of the council, although it is there erroneously stated that such ordinance failed of passage, it is the duty of the presiding officer and clerk of the council to authenticate and of the latter to record the same which may be enforced by writ of mandamus.

2. A board of county commissioners is authorized by the provisions of Sections 2421, 6949 and 7557 General Code, to construct a bridge or viaduct as a part of a road improvement into, within or through a municipality in such county upon the consent of the council thereof, and where no part of the expense of such improvement is assumed by the municipality such requirement of consent is_ fully met by the affirmative vote of a majority of the duly elected members of the council for the passage of an ordinance granting such consent.

3. Neither the provisions of the charter of the city of Cincinnati nor the provisions of Section 4366-2, General Code, relative to the powers of a city planning commission have any application to the erection of a bridge or viaduct on an inter-county or main market road.

Writ allowed.

Day, Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.