City of Columbus v. Kim
118 Ohio St. 3d 93 · Ohio Supreme Court · 2008
Facts
On May 13, 2004, Rebecca Kim's dog barked constantly for approximately 1.5 hours, from 4:30 p.m. until 6:00 p.m. Her neighbor, Joseph Berardi, testified that the dog's barking was so loud it could be heard over his lawnmower and from inside his house with the windows closed and air conditioning running. A veterinarian, Dr. George H. Urham Jr., corroborated the incessant barking during a house call at the Berardi residence from 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Procedural history
Kim was charged with violating Columbus City Code 2327.14 and convicted by the trial court, which imposed a fine. Kim appealed, alleging the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague, but the court of appeals affirmed the trial court's decision. The court of appeals then found its judgment in conflict with another appellate court's decision and certified the record to this court for review and final determination.
Issue
Is Columbus City Code 2327.14, which prohibits harboring an animal that emits unreasonably loud or disturbing sounds of such character, intensity, and duration as to disturb the peace, unconstitutionally vague on its face and as applied?
Holding
No, Columbus City Code 2327.14 is not unconstitutionally vague on its face or as applied. The court affirmed the decision of the court of appeals.
Rule
A statute is unconstitutionally vague if it provides no standard of conduct at all, meaning an individual of ordinary intelligence would not understand what is prohibited. The challenger must prove this beyond a reasonable doubt. Columbus City Code 2327.14 is not vague because it incorporates an objective standard, "unreasonably loud or disturbing," and provides specific factors to consider: "character, intensity and duration." These terms are sufficient for an ordinary person exercising common sense to understand and comply with the ordinance.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.