Drees Company v. Hamilton Township
Ohio Supreme Court
970 N.E.2d 916 (2012)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Hamilton Township (defendant) was experiencing rapid growth and imposed a fee on all building-permit applicants. The stated goal of the fee was to give the township funds necessary to provide new properties with the same levels of municipal services existing properties had. Services explicitly included in the adoption of the fee were police, fire, roads, and parks. The township placed the fee funds in a separate account, not the town’s general fund, and the funds in the account could not be used for any other purpose. However, the funds were not earmarked for use for services in a particular geographic area. In other words, the funds were not required to be used for, for example, roads near the properties that paid the fee, but could be used for roads generally in the township. Drees Company (plaintiff) sued the township, claiming that the fees were unconstitutional because they were taxes not authorized by law. The trial court ruled in the township’s favor, and the court of appeals affirmed. Drees appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pfeifer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.