
    CONKLE v. CITY OF BELLEVUE.
    Ohio Supreme Court.
    No. 19725.
    Decided Dec. 21, 1927.
    Error to Sandusky Appeals.
    Judgment reversed.
    103. ASSESSMENTS — Sec. 12075 GC. provides a concurrent remedy under facts and circumstances of this controversy. (See Conkle v. Bellevue, OA. 4 Abs. 299.)
    Mr. Allen G. Aigler,1 Bellevue, for plaintiff in error., :
    Mr. Kenneth P. Fox, Bellevue, for defendant in error.
   It is ordered and adjudged by this Court that the judgment of the Court of Appeals of Sandusky county be and the same hereby is reversed. In the opinion of a majority of this Court, Section 12075 of the General Code provides a concurrent rem'edy under the facts and circumstances of this controversy. It is therefore ordered that said cause be remanded to the Court of Appeals of Sandusky county for further proceedings according to law.

(Marshall, CJ., Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.)  