Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
City of Norwood v. Horney, 110 Ohio St.3d 353 (2006), was a case brought before the Ohio Supreme Court in 2006. The case came upon the heels of Kelo v.City of New London, in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that commercial development justified the use of eminent domain.
In Ohio, there are only 40 rental homes affordable and available for every 100 of the lowest-income renters, and someone working full time would need to earn $19.09 an hour to afford a modest two ...
"Today's ruling is shameful and it will undoubtedly make homelessness worse," Jesse Rabinowitz, the campaign director of the Washington-based non-profit the National Homelessness Law Center, said ...
Lewis appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court to intervene after an appellate court ruled that he had improperly filed suit with the city’s law director instead of the city council. [30] [31] In April 2020, the Ohio Supreme Court decided not to consider his appeal. [32] Akron mayor Dan Horrigan wrote an op-ed attacking Lewis. "For all the ...
Poser and others who work with the homeless population across Wisconsin are still absorbing the June 28 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Grants Pass, Oregon vs. Johnson case. The Ninth ...
After the Supreme Court decision, the SBA List challenged the constitutionality of the Ohio law in federal court in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in Susan B. Anthony List v. Ohio Elections Commission. On September 11, 2014, Judge Timothy Black struck down the law as unconstitutional. [25]
City of Boise, in 2018, the court found that it was cruel and unusual punishment to impose criminal penalties on homeless individuals for sleeping in public if there were not adequate shelter beds.
Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that an East Cleveland, Ohio zoning ordinance that prohibited Inez Moore, a black grandmother, from living with her grandchild was unconstitutional.