Stockberger v. Henry, 962 N.E.2d 828

Knox County engineer's office participates in CORSA; MVGT funds restricted to highway purposes.
Dispute centers on paying the engineer’s CORSA premium share from MVGT funds.
Trial court declared some CORSA costs payable from MVGT but avoided injunctive relief mandating payment.
Court previously decided Knox I (2006) limited MVGT funds to highway-related costs; new facts involve 2007-2008 premiums.
Trial court found deductible for truck repairs payable from MVGT; record on premiums was contested.
This appeal/result remands for proceedings consistent with law and this opinion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May MVGT funds pay CORSA premiums?	Henry: MVGT funds restricted; not for premiums.	Stockberger/commissioners: CORSA costs are operating costs	Not permitted; no sufficient nexus to highway purposes.
Is the action barred by res judicata or lack standing/capacity?	Henry: Knox I bars current claim.	Commissioners: standing and capacity exist; not res judicata.	Not res judicata; commissioners have standing and capacity; suit proper.
What standard governs review of nexus determination?	Engineer argues abuse-of-discretion.	Court decides nexus as a legal question.	Mixed question; review de novo for legal determination.
Should the court issue a mandatory injunction?	Commissioners seek injunction to compel payment.	Engineer argues no mandatory relief should issue.	Injunction not warranted; cross-appeal overruled.

Knox Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. Knox Cty. Engr., 109 Ohio St.3d 353 (2006-Ohio-2576) (MVGT restrictions; highway-related nexus inquiry outlined)
Madden v. Bower, 20 Ohio St.2d 135 (1969) (health-insurance nexus to highway-related services distinguished from CORSA)
Grandle v. Rhodes, 169 Ohio St. 77 (1959) (limits on Constitution §5a, Article XII expenditures to highway purposes)
Whitehead v. Gen. Tel. Co., 20 Ohio St.2d 108 (1969) (collateral estoppel; collateral aspects of res judicata)