Case Title: Bobersky v. Youngstown

Citation: 1992-Ohio-26

Docket Number: 19911336

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1992-06-10T00:00:00Z

Document:
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
 The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of  
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 1992,   
pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice Thomas J.   
Moyer. 
 
 Please call any errors to the attention of the  
Reporter's Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio.  Attention:   
Walter S. Kobalka, Reporter, or Justine Michael, Administrative  
Assistant.  Tel.:  (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.  Your  
comments on this pilot project are also welcome. 
 
 NOTE:  Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to  
the full texts of the opinions after they have been released  
electronically to the public.  The reader is therefore advised to   
check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West Publishing   
Company for the final versions of these opinions.  The advance  
sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume and page  
numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound volumes of  
the Ohio Official Reports. 
 
 
 Bobersky et al., Appellants, v. City of Youngstown et  
al., Appellees. 
 
 [Cite as Bobersky v. Youngstown (1992),     Ohio St.3d    .] 
 
 Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed. 
 
 (No. 91-1336 -- Submitted May 6, 1992 -- Decided June 10,  
1992.) 
 
 Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Mahoning County,  
No. 90 C.A. 52. 
 
 Green, Haines, Sgambati, Murphy & Macala Co., L.P.A., Dennis  
Haines, Barry Laine and David A. Bobovnyik, for appellants. 
 
 Edwin Romero, Law Director, and Cheryl L. Waite, for  
appellee city of Youngstown. 
 
 Richard J. Mastriana, for appellees Carl and Joann Ross. 
 
 Lee I. Fisher, Attorney General, John P. Bartley and Joan C.  
Weiser, urging affirmance for amicus curiae, Ohio Department of  
Natural Resources. 
 
 This cause is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been  
improvidently allowed. 
 
 The court orders that the court of appeals' opinion not  
be published in the Ohio Official Reports, and that it may not be   
cited as authority except by the parties inter se. 
 
 Sweeney, Holmes, Wright and Resnick, JJ., concur. 
 
 
 Moyer, C.J., Douglas and H. Brown, JJ., separately  
dissent. 
 
 Moyer, C.J., dissenting.  Although I agree with the  
reasons of Justice Brown that a merit decision should be rendered   
in this cause, I would affirm the judgment of the court of  
appeals. 
 
 Herbert R. Brown, J., dissenting.     This case presents   
significant issues of real property law.  The issues presented are   
not easily resolved under existing law.  Thus, it is not  
appropriate in this case to render a de facto decision by finding   
the appeal to have been "improvidently allowed."  This case should   
be decided on the merits.  Moreover, I think that the decision  
reached by the court of appeals should be reversed. 
 
 Douglas, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting  
opinion.