1901 Cincinnati v. Allison, 12 Ohio Dec. 376 (Ohio.Com.Pl.,1901)
(The preservation of the public health is a proper and necessary
exercise of the police power of the state.)
1902 City of Lorain v. Rolling, 14 Ohio C.D. 82 (Ohio.Cir.,1902)(Rev.St.
§ 2142 (See Gen.Code, § 4463), providing for quarantine grounds for
cities and villages, and requiring the consent of the municipality or
township in which such grounds are located, if without the city
establishing them, does not apply to pesthouses, and a city may erect a
pesthouse outside its corporate limits, under Rev.St. § 2169 (See
Gen.Code, § 4090), without obtaining the consent of the township in
which such pesthouse is located; such section placing no restriction on
a city as to obtaining the consent of municipal or township authorities
before establishing a pesthouse.)
1902 Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Board of Health of
State of Louisiana, 22 S.Ct. 811 (U.S.La.,1902)( The quarantine laws of
the several states were not abrogated by the immigration acts of March
3, 1875, c. 141, 18 Stat. 477, August 3, 1882, c. 376, 22 Stat. 214,
June 26, 1884, c. 121, 23 Stat. 58, February 26, 1885, c. 164, 23 Stat.
332, February 23, 1887, c. 220, 24 Stat. 415, and March 3, 1891, c. 551,
26 Stat. 1084, and the regulations to enforce the same; but the
safeguards which they create and the regulations which they impose on
the introduction of immigrants are ancillary and subject to such
quarantine laws. Judgment (1899) 25 So. 591, 51 La.Ann. 645, 56 L.R.A.
795, 72 Am.St.Rep. 458, affirmed.)
1902 Rolling v. City of Lorain, 13 Ohio Dec. 87 (Ohio.Com.Pl.,1902)
(Landowners could enjoin building of city pesthouse under Rev.St. §
2169 (See Gen.Code, § 4090), and 1692 subd. 23 (repealed), as a
nuisance, notwithstanding pesthouse had not been built. The construction
of a city pesthouse across highway from plaintiffs' land, and 24 and 40
rods from two school houses, was enjoined as a nuisance regardless of
danger from contagious diseases.)
1905 Meily v. City of Columbus, 17 Ohio C.D. 822 (Ohio.Cir.,1905)(Under
Rev.St. § 2128 (See Gen.Code, § 4432 et seq.), authorizing the board
of health having jurisdiction to provide for all persons confined in a
quarantined house and directing that the expenses so incurred when
properly certified by the president and clerk of the board of health
shall be paid by the person or persons quarantined when able to, and
when not by the city, an oral contract with the board of health, for
necessaries, furnished to a family during quarantine, is binding on the
city, it appearing that the account has been certified by the president
and clerk of the board of health that the quarantined family was not
able to pay.)
1905 Meily v. City of Columbus, 17 Ohio C.D. 822 (Ohio.Cir.,1905)(Under
Rev.St. § 2128 (See Gen.Code, § 4432 et seq.), authorizing the board
of health having jurisdiction to provide for all persons confined in a
quarantined house and directing that the expenses so incurred when
properly certified by the president and clerk of the board of health
shall be paid by the person or persons quarantined when able to, and
when not by the city, an oral contract with the board of health, for
necessaries, furnished to a family during quarantine, is binding on the
city, it appearing that the account has been certified by the president
and clerk of the board of health that the quarantined family was not
able to pay.)
1907 Village of Barberton v. Lohmers, 32 Ohio C.D. 684 Ohio.Cir.,1907
(An action was maintainable under Gen.Code, § 4432 to recover
compensation from village for medical services to quarantined smallpox
patients alleged to be unable to pay therefor as against contention that
affirmative action of board of health was a condition precedent to
bringing of such an action.)
1918 State ex rel. Ohio Hair Products Co. v. Rendigs, 120 N.E. 836
(Ohio,1918) (Under Gen.Code, § 3650, conferring certain municipal
powers, a municipality may regulate and suppress all places that in its
judgment are likely to be injurious to the health of its inhabitants.)
1919 Ex parte Mason, 30 Ohio Dec. 139 (Ohio.Com.Pl.,1919)(
Regulations adopted by state board of health under Gen.Code, § 1237
authorizing the placing under quarantine a person suffering from
venereal disease is valid and does not violate U.S.C.A.Const. art.
Gen.Code, § 1237 providing that the state board of health shall have
"supreme authority" in matters of quarantine means supreme
legal discretion or authority and not arbitrary power.)
1919 Leonard v. State, 127 N.E. 464 (Ohio,1919)(The measure of the
police power of the state is the measure of the public need, limited
only by the state and federal Constitutions.)
1921 State ex rel. Village of Cuyahoga Heights v. Zangerle, 134 N.E.
686
Ohio,1921) (The peace, morals, health, and safety of the people are a
matter of concern to the state, and, when the state has enacted general
laws providing sanitary and similar regulations, effective throughout
the state, the different subdivisions of the government may be required
to contribute to the carrying out of the legislation.)
1921 Williams v. Scudder, 131 N.E. 481 Ohio,1921 ) (Public health is
one of the most vital subjects for the exercise of the police power of
the state.; Primarily the state Legislature is the judge of the need of
the exercise of the police power in relation to public health, and in
the exercise of that judgment must be given wide discretion.)
1922 Ex parte Company, 139 N.E. 204 (Ohio,1922) The adoption of
regulations by the public health council of the state department of
health under Gen.Code, §§ 1234-1236, declaring chancroid, gonorrhea,
and syphilis to be contagious, infectious diseases dangerous to the
public health, empowering the health commissioner of each city to
examine persons reasonably suspected of having a venereal disease,
declaring all known prostitutes and persons associating with them to be
persons reasonably suspected of having a venereal disease, and
authorizing the health commissioner to quarantine any person who has or
is reasonably suspected of having a venereal disease whenever in his
opinion quarantine is necessary for the protection of the public health,
held a lawful exercise of the police power of the state.
1926 State v. Thompkins, 664 N.E.2d 926 (Ohio,1996)(Laws passed by
virtue of police power will be upheld if they bear real and substantial
relation to object sought to be obtained, namely, health, safety, morals
or general welfare of public and are not arbitrary, discriminatory,
capricious or unreasonable.)
1930 In re Jarrell, 28 Ohio N.P.(N.S.) 473 (Ohio.Com.Pl.,1930)(
Health commissioner has authority under 107 Ohio Laws 522, Gen.Code,
§§ 1232- 1261-43, to place persons in quarantine who are suspected of
having a venereal disease. Where person had been quarantined by health
commissioner as suspected of having a venereal disease, court had
authority to inquire into question whether or not such person was
infected with a venereal disease or that quarantine was necessary for
protection to public health.)
1933 State ex rel. Hanna v. Spitler, 190 N.E. 584
(Ohio.App.3.Dist.Hancock.C ,1933)(Apart from powers that may be
delegated to it from time to time by the Legislature, a municipal
corporation derives its right to adopt and enforce sanitary and other
similar regulations from article XVIII, section 3, of the Constitution
of Ohio.)
1938 State v. Honaker, 3 Ohio Supp. 143 (Ohio Com.Pl.,1938)( Under
interstate commerce clause, state may guard against the introduction of
anything that may corrupt the morals or endanger the life or health of
its citizens, and to this end may enact inspection, quarantine, and
health laws. U.S.C.A.Const. art. 1, § 8)
1938 City of Cleveland v. Mulloff, 28 Ohio Law Abs. 324 Ohio.
App.8.Dist.Cuyahoga., 1938) (Municipalities are empowered to pass
regulations pertaining to health and sanitation, since public health and
sanitation is within the police power conferred upon municipalities.)
1940 State ex rel. Mowrer v. Underwood, 27 N.E.2d 773 Ohio,1940 (The
protection and preservation of public health are among the prime
governmental concerns and functions of the state as a sovereignty, and
the state, acting through the General Assembly, may enact general laws
to that end.)
1943 City of Cincinnati v. Correll, 49 N.E.2d 412 (Ohio,1943)(Laws or
ordinances passed by virtue of the "police power" which limit
or abrogate constitutionally guaranteed rights must not be arbitrary,
discriminatory, capricious or unreasonable, and must bear a real and
substantial relation to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of
the public.)
1943 City of Cincinnati v. Correll, 49 N.E.2d 412 (Ohio,1943)(The
rights guaranteed by Bill of Rights are not unrestricted but are subject
to limitation or abrogation to extent necessary to promote the health,
safety, morals, or general welfare of society as a whole, and
regulations limiting or abrogating these guaranties are sustained by
virtue of a power inherent in governments commonly called the
"police power." Const. art. 1, § 1.)
1945 Ex parte Kilbane, 67 N.E.2d 22 (Ohio.Com.Pl.,1945)(Regulations
of the department of health of Cleveland providing for examination of
persons reasonably suspected of having venereal disease and for
quarantine of persons found to be infected with a venereal disease, are
a lawful exercise of the police powerof the state. Fact that criminal
charges against relatrix of selling intoxicating liquor without a
license from a drinking establishment were dropped in municipal court
did not affect duty of health commissioner of city to quarantine
relatrix in accordance with regulations of the department of health when
it was established by medical examination while relatrix was detained on
the criminal charge that she was affected with a venereal disease. Where
address, where woman suffering from a venereal disease was arrested on
charge, which was later dropped, of selling intoxicating liquors, was a
place designated by the Army and Navy as a focal point for the spread of
venereal diseases, health commissioner of city was justified in ordering
woman quarantined in accordance with regulations of city department of
health. Regulations adopted by Public Health Council of Department of
Health authorize the health commissioner of a city to make or cause to
be made an examination of a person reasonably suspected of having a
venereal disease, and if found to be so infected, and whenever in his
opinion the public health requires it, to order such person placed in
quarantine.)
1952 Stubbs v. Mitchell, 114 N.E.2d 158 (Ohio.App.2.Dist.Franklin.,
1952) (The authority for exercise of broad health power comes under
police power inherent in the state, and such power is practically
co-extensive with necessities that may arise for purpose indicated.
Gen.Code, §§ 1261-42, 5652- 16.)
1953 Kraus v. City of Cleveland, 116 N.E.2d 779 (Ohio.Com.Pl.,1953)
(An individual's right to treat his health as he deems best must yield
to common good, where a state or local subdivision thereof, in lawful
exercise of police power, enacts a public health measure deemed
necessary for promotion of health of substantial segment of its
population; The right to enact health measure does not depend on
presence or prevalence of infectious, communicable or dangerous disease,
but public necessity, as determined by legislative body, is the test.
The state is competent to pass a public health measure.)
1966 Leet v. City of Eastlake, 220 N.E.2d 121
(Ohio.App.7.Dist.Lake.Co., 1966)(The state and municipalities may make
all reasonable, necessary, and appropriate provisions to promote health,
morals, peace, and welfare of the community but may not make
unreasonable regulations.)
1979 Chickerneo v. Society Nat. Bank of Cleveland, 390 N.E.2d 1183
(Ohio,1979)(Public policy is a principle declaring that no one can
lawfully do that which has a tendency to be injurious to the public
welfare and must be applied with caution and limited to those
circumstances patently within the reasons upon which principle rests.)
1984 DeMoise v. Dowell, 461 N.E.2d 1286 (Ohio,1984) (Protection and
preservation of the public health is a prime governmental concern and
thus a function of the state. State can directly exercise its police
power concerning public health or it may delegate that power to other
governmental agencies.)
1991 State v. Anderson, 566 N.E.2d 1224 (Ohio,1991)(Any exercise of
police power will be valid if it bears real and substantial relation to
public health, safety, morals or general welfare of public and if it is
not unreasonable or arbitrary.)
