News & Analysis as of

OH Supreme Court Property Owners

Oliva Gibbs LLP

Third Time’s a Charm: Ohio Supreme Court Remands Case for Failing to Follow Instructions

Oliva Gibbs LLP on

In August 2016, AWMS Water Solutions, L.L.C., AWMS Holdings L.L.C., and AWMS Rt. 169, L.L.C. (collectively, “Appellants”) filed their original writ of mandamus to commence property-appropriation proceedings since, in their...more

McGlinchey Stafford

Am I Entitled to Indemnification? - McGlinchey Commercial Law Bulletin - September 29, 2023

McGlinchey Stafford on

Ohio- Conversion- Bradford v. A Star Properties, LLC, 9th Dist. Summit No. 2023-Ohio-3451- In this appeal, the Ninth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s decision to grant defendants judgment on a claim for...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

When the Rubber Doesn’t Meet the Road: Ohio Supreme Court Sends Eminent Domain Dispute over Park Bike Path Back to Trial Court

Bricker Graydon LLP on

The construction of a bike path ran into a bump in the road when the Mill Creek Metropolitan Park District (Park District) attempted to take land through eminent domain. The Park District is a public entity that is attempting...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Take that, federal Sixth Circuit! Ohio Supremes reject “takings” claims against county tax foreclosures

Bricker Graydon LLP on

The see-sawing of emotions among advocates for county land banking activities in Ohio continued this week, with hopes again rising upon a favorable decision by the Supreme Court of Ohio. On April 4, 2023, the Court...more

Roetzel & Andress

Ohio Eminent Domain: Supreme Court Opens Door for Agencies to Pay Less Compensation Through “Appraisal Shopping”

Roetzel & Andress on

Under Ohio Revised Code 163.04, a condemning authority is required to make a good faith offer to purchase property it seeks to acquire at least 30 days before it may file an eminent domain lawsuit to take the property. If it...more

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL

Eminent Domain Insight: Ohio Supreme Court Weighs in on Challenging the Necessity of a Public Use in a Utility Condemnation Action

Some might argue that challenging the necessity of an appropriation involving a public utility or common carrier is a futile act, given the presumption of the necessity under R.C. 163.09(B)(1)(c). In State ex rel. Bohlen v....more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

Ohio Supreme Court Decision Provides Further Clarity on the Common Law Distinction Between a Reservation and an Exception

On February 15, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued its decision in Peppertree Farms, L.L.C., et al. v. Thonen, et al., providing further clarity on the common law distinction between a “reservation” of a property interest...more

Roetzel & Andress

One Less Way for Ohio Landowners to Challenge Royalty Severances

Roetzel & Andress on

On February 15, 2022, the Ohio Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Peppertree Farms, L.L.C. v. Thonen establishing that, unless expressly stated otherwise, an oil and gas royalty interest retained in a deed...more

Roetzel & Andress

What Are My Constitutional Rights For Eminent Domain Appeals In Ohio?

Roetzel & Andress on

In the last five years, several new cases have come before Ohio’s Supreme Court related to eminent domain (ED) law, as well as the rulings, rights, and amendments surrounding Ohio’s ED process. It can be a complex issue...more

K&L Gates LLP

Navigating Ohio's Wild West: Exceptions to the Marketable Title Act

K&L Gates LLP on

Last year in West v. Bode, the Ohio Supreme Court determined that mineral estates are subject to the statutory double barrel of both the Marketable Title Act (MTA) and the Dormant Mineral Act (DMA), providing surface owners...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

Ohio Supreme Court Provides Some Clarity on the Specificity Required to Reserve Interests Under the Marketable Title Act

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

On March 16, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued its opinion in Erickson et al. v. Morrison et al., Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-746, clarifying the decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 2018-Ohio-4959, and holding that a...more

Stoel Rives LLP

Idaho Real Estate & Development Law Update: Recent Case Highlights Vital Lessons for Holders of Rights of First Refusal

Stoel Rives LLP on

The Idaho Supreme Court provided important lessons to people who deal with rights of first refusal (ROFRs) on real property in its recent decision Mulberry v. Burns Concrete, Inc., No. 45184 (Idaho Feb. 21, 2019). A ROFR is a...more

12 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide