Ohio Supreme Court, 1966

Arcaro Bros. Builders, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided June 22, 1966 · Brown, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Schneider, Tapt, Zimmerman

7 Ohio St. 2d 32; 218 N.E.2d 179; 36 Ohio Op. 2d 18; 1966 Ohio LEXIS 310

Cases that cite this one

21 later published cases cite this decision.

Gibraltar Mausoleum Corp. v. City of Toledo (Ohio Ct. App. 1995)
State Ex Rel. Active USA, Inc. v. Conrad, Unpublished Decision (12-9-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
Jubb v. Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles (Medina County Court of Common Pleas 2001)
Hayes v. State Medical Board of Ohio (Ohio Ct. App. 2000)
Heiney v. Sylvania Township Board of Zoning Appeals (Ohio Ct. App. 1998)
In re Rocky Point Plaza Corp. (Ohio Ct. App. 1993)
In re G.W. (Ohio Ct. App. 2020)
Warren Family Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Toledo (Ohio Ct. App. 2016)
BD Dev. v. Vandalia (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)
Dauterman v. Washington Township Board, Unpublished Decision (4-20-2000) (Ohio Ct. App. 2000)
Pack v. West Clermont Local School District Board of Education (Clermont County Court of Common Pleas 1985)
Gibraltar Mausoleum Corp. v. City of Cincinnati (Ohio Ct. App. 1981)
Zurow v. City of Cleveland (Ohio Ct. App. 1978)
Stores Realty Co. v. City of Cleveland (Ohio 1975)
Doelker v. State (Ohio 1967)
United Assn. of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipe Fitting Industry v. Jack's Heating, Air Conditioning & Plumbing, Inc. (Ohio Ct. App. 2013)
Doctors' Prof. Assn. v. St. Emp. Rel. Bd., Unpublished Decision (11-4-2004) (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)
Dudukovich v. Lorain Metropolitan Housing Authority (Ohio 1979)
Hausmann & Johnson, Inc. v. Berea Bd. of Bldg. Code Appeals (Ohio Ct. App. 1974)
Capello v. City of Mayfield Heights (Ohio 1971)
Box v. City of Cleveland Board of Building Standards & Building Appeals (Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court 1968)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals refused permission to have any of the witnesses sworn, and allowed unidentified statements, apparently from the audience attending the hearing, to be recorded in the transcript.

Section 2319.01, Revised Code, provides:

‘ ‘ The testimony of witnesses may be taken:

“(A) By affidavit;

“(B) By deposition;

“(C) By oral examination.”

Section 2319.02, Revised Code, provides:

“An affidavit is a written declaration under oath, made without notice to the adverse party. A deposition is a written declaration under oath, made upon notice to the adverse party. Oral testimony is that delivered from the lips of the witness.” (Emphasis supplied.)

Section 2317.30, Revised Code, provides:

“Before testifying, a witness shall be sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

Thus, the record in this appeal contains no evidence.

Hence, the decision of the board was not supported “by *34the preponderance of substantial, reliable and probative evidence on the whole record.” Section 2506.04, Revised Code.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is therefore reversed, and the cause is remanded to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a hearing in accordance with this opinion.

Judgment reversed.

Tapt, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert and Brown, JJ., concur. Schneider, J., not participating.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.