State Ex Rel. Cleveland Trust Co. v. Pethtel

Ohio Supreme Court

State Ex Rel. Cleveland Trust Co. v. Pethtel

30 N.E.2d 991, 137 Ohio St. 525, 137 Ohio St. (N.S.) 525, 19 Ohio Op. 240, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 514

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 31, 1940

Docket28063

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 30 N.E.2d 991 (State Ex Rel. Cleveland Trust Co. v. Pethtel) 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

State Ex Rel. Cleveland Trust Co. v. Pethtel, 30 N.E.2d 991, 137 Ohio St. 525, 137 Ohio St. (N.S.) 525, 19 Ohio Op. 240, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 514 (Ohio 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Counsel for relator admit in their briefs that the writ of prohibition ordinarily is granted only when there is no other adequate remedy, but urge that an exception should be made in this case to prevent extended and expensive litigation — in other words to decide cases in advance.

We adhere to the principle that the high prerogative writ of prohibition will not issue where there is another adequate remedy. Silliman v. Court of Common Pleas, 126 Ohio St., 338, 185 N. E., 420, and cases therein cited.

The demurrer to the petition is sustained and leave to plead further is given.

Demurrer sustained.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Turner, Williams, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur. Day, J., dissents.

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