Huck v. Muskingum Township, Unpublished Decision (11-1-2000)
Huck v. Muskingum Township, Unpublished Decision (11-1-2000)
Opinion of the Court
Appellee contends that since Am.Sub.H.B. 350, including R.C.
Appellant asserts that there are several cases presently before the Ohio Supreme Court raising this precise issue and urges this court to hold a decision in abeyance until the issue is resolved by that Court. We decline to do so.
Upon consideration, and pursuant to this court's previous decision inHuck as well as our decision in Fannin, supra, this appeal is DISMISSED.
Appellee has also requested that this court find this appeal to be frivolous pursuant to App.R. 23. We decline to do so.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
The Court finds that there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is further ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Meigs County Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Exceptions.
Harsha, J. and Evans, J. Concur
____________________________________ Peter B. Abele, Administrative Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.