Rienoehl v. Huonker
66 Ohio St. (N.S.) 657
This text of 66 Ohio St. (N.S.) 657 (Rienoehl v. Huonker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Rienoehl v. Huonker, 66 Ohio St. (N.S.) 657 (Ohio 1902).
Opinion
Judgment affirmed on the ground that the request should have been made of the solicitor in office,, and not of his predecessor; and on the further ground that injunction is not the proper remedy. The remedy is quo warranto.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
66 Ohio St. (N.S.) 657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rienoehl-v-huonker-ohio-1902.