State ex rel. Aleen v. Wahl

Ohio Court of Appeals

State ex rel. Aleen v. Wahl

23 Ohio Law. Abs. 416

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 27, 1936

DocketNo 2722

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 Ohio Law. Abs. 416 (State ex rel. Aleen v. Wahl) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Aleen v. Wahl, 23 Ohio Law. Abs. 416 (Ohio Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

By BARNES, PJ.

The respondent files a motion to strike from relator’s petition the following statement “and from her salary from June 16th, 1936, at $83.33 per month.” The relator in her petition seeks to be restored to her position as janitress in the Ohio Department Building in the city of Columbus, Ohio, which position she claims to hold by virtue of a Civil Service appointment and from which she was unlawfully removed. In addition the prayer seeks recovery of her salary from the date of such removal.

Counsel for respondent in support of their motion cite the case of Williams, Director, etc. v The State ex Gribben et, 127 Oh St 398. This case is directly in point and therein the Supreme Court determined that mandamus would not lie to enforce the payment of a claim unliquidated and indefinite in amount. Other authorities cited by counsel for respondent support their contention. Counsel for relator has filed no answer brief and further has indicated that they do not desire so to do. The motion will be sustained.

Exceptions will be allowed. Entry may be drawn accordingly.

HORNBECK and BODEY, JJ, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

By BARNES, PJ.

The respondent files a motion to strike from relator’s petition the following statement “and from her salary from June 16th, 1936, at $83.33 per month.” The relator in her petition seeks to be restored to her position as janitress in the Ohio Department Building in the city of Columbus, Ohio, which position she claims to hold by virtue of a Civil Service appointment and from which she was unlawfully removed. In addition the prayer seeks recovery of her salary from the date of such removal.

Counsel for respondent in support of their motion cite the case of Williams, Director, etc. v The State ex Gribben et, 127 Oh St 398. This case is directly in point and therein the Supreme Court determined that mandamus would not lie to enforce the payment of a claim unliquidated and indefinite in amount. Other authorities cited by counsel for respondent support their contention. Counsel for relator has filed no answer brief and further has indicated that they do not desire so to do. The motion will be sustained.

Exceptions will be allowed. Entry may be drawn accordingly.

HORNBECK and BODEY, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 Ohio Law. Abs. 416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-aleen-v-wahl-ohioctapp-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack