Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Ohio Circuit Courts Volume 29

Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Ohio Circuit Courts Volume 29

By (author) 

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1920 edition. Excerpt: ...01 Tjhicago au Lucas County Appeals. thorizing the issuance of a license to persons to sell cigarettes upon the payment of $100.00 was held valid although it delegated to the mayor the entire subject of granting and revoking licenses to persons engaged in the business. The contention was made in that case that this ordinance vested arbitrary power in the mayor and that it was for this reason invalid. The most recent utterance of the Supreme Court of the United States on the questions now under consideration may be found in a group of cases decided by that court on January 22, 1917, and entitled Hall v. Geiger-Jones C0. 242 U. S. 536 (62 Bull. 177); the other cases are Caldwell v. Sioux Falls Stock Yards C0.; Merrick v. Halsey rfi Co. Many of the cases which have been cited were based on statutes which contained provisions for a review by the courts of the decision made by the commissioner or board having charge of the issuing and revocation of licenses. Indeed it is probable that most of the statutes on this subject have a provision of that character; but all of the statutes do not have this provision. In the group of cases last cited such provision was found to exist in the statutes under review, and in some of those cases comment was made on that provision; but in the case last cited the court held that the absence of such provision did not render the statute invalid since there is a presumption against wanton action by any commissioner, and if there should be such disregard of duty a remedy in the courts would necessarily be implied. I call attention to Reetz v. Michigan, 188 U. S. 505 47 L. Ed. 563; 23 S. Ct. 390, which was an action arising under a statute of that state for the appointment of a "board of registration more

Product details

  • Paperback | 242 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 13mm | 440g
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236784367
  • 9781236784360