State ex rel. DeWeaver v. Faust

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. DeWeaver v. Faust

30 Ohio Law Rep. 61

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 1, 1965

Docket38693

StatusPublished

This text of 30 Ohio Law Rep. 61 (State ex rel. DeWeaver v. Faust) 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. DeWeaver v. Faust, 30 Ohio Law Rep. 61 (Ohio 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Schneider, Judge.

Sections 2506.01 to 2506.04, inclusive, Revised Code, afford an adequate remedy at law by way of appeal from a final order, adjudication or decision of an administrative board, so that the writ of prohibition will not issue at the instance of a party who alleges irregularities in the proceedings of such a board and an[62]*62ticipates that such a board will deprive him of procedural and substantive rights.

Judgment affirmed.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert and Brown, JJ., concur.

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

Schneider, Judge.

Sections 2506.01 to 2506.04, inclusive, Revised Code, afford an adequate remedy at law by way of appeal from a final order, adjudication or decision of an administrative board, so that the writ of prohibition will not issue at the instance of a party who alleges irregularities in the proceedings of such a board and an[62]*62ticipates that such a board will deprive him of procedural and substantive rights.

Judgment affirmed.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Ohio Law Rep. 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-deweaver-v-faust-ohio-1965.