High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
1
IN THE TENTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALSFRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIOPOUR HOUSE, INC.
4301 Bennett RoadToledo, Ohio 43612
Appellant,-VS-OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
246 North High St.Columbus, OH 43215
Appellee.
))))))))))))))
NO. 09 AP-157Trial Court No. 08 CVF07-9510REGULAR CALENDARAPPELLATE BRIEF
Maurice A. Thompson (0078548)88 E. Broad, Suite 1120Columbus, Ohio 43215Tel: (614) 224-4422Fax: (614) 224 4644Email:mthompson@buckeyeinstitute.orgCounsel of Record for Appellant
2
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES……...………………………………………………………………3
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR.……..……………………………………………………..............4
ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW……………….…………………………………………..4
STATEMENT OF THE CASE……………………………………………………………………5
FACTS…………………………………………………………………………………………….5
ARGUMENT I
N SUPPORT OF ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR……………………………...
....9Proposition of Law No. 1:A proprietor does not permit smoking when it does everything within its power to stop
the smoking……………………………………………………………...
.
…………
.
…...
..9Proposition of Law No. 2:Enforcement and Application of R.C. 3794 as a strict liability offense is inconsistent withthe plain language of R.C. 3794
…………………………………………….……………13
Proposition of Law No. 3:If R.C. 3794.02(A) imposes liability on the proprietor in this case, the it is
unconstitutionally vague as applied to that proprietor………………………………...
....15
CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………….
.17
PROOF OF SERVICE…………………………………………………………………………..
.18
3
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Akron v. Meissner
(1993), 92 Ohio App.3d 1, 4, 633 N.E.2d 1201.
Beau v. Lindley
(1978), 56 Ohio St.2d 310, 383 N.E.2d 907, 10 O.O.3d 438.
Bexley v. Selcer
(1998), 129 Ohio App.3d 72.
, 20 Ohio St.2d 125, 254 N.E.2d 8.Grayned, 408 U.S. at 108-109, 92 S.Ct. 2294, 33 L.Ed.2d 222
Black‟s Law Dictionary (5 Ed. Rev. 1979) 1026.
R.C. 3794.02(A)R.C. 3794.02(B)R.C. 3794.02(D)R.C. 3794.02(E)OAC 3701-52-08(E)
Add a Comment