State ex rel. Dormody v. McClure

364 N.E.2d 278, 50 Ohio St. 2d 335, 4 Ohio Op. 3d 476, 1977 Ohio LEXIS 423
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 29, 1977·No. Nos. 76-1237, 76-1275, 76-1366, 77-194 and 77-231·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Relators seek writs of prohibition to prevent respondent from trying them for the offenses of driving while under the influence of alcohol (R. C. 4511.19), alleging that respondent has no jurisdiction due to the fact that the Uniform Traffic Ticket sanctioned by Traf. R. 21 does not provide that the signature of the issuing officer be verified.

Prohibition is not the proper remedy where there is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State, ex rel. Dickison, v. Court of Common Pleas (1971), 28 Ohio St. 2d 179. Respondent has jurisdiction of the persons and subject matter. Any complaint with regard to the form of the ticket can be dealt with by motion prior to trial or in the ordinary course of appeal.

Since the relators have an adequate remedy at law, the writs are denied.

Writs denied.

O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Celebrezze, P. Brown, Sweeney and Looher, JJ., concur. W. Brown, J., not participating.

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

State ex rel. Dormody v. McClure, 364 N.E.2d 278, 50 Ohio St. 2d 335, 4 Ohio Op. 3d 476, 1977 Ohio LEXIS 423 (Ohio 1977).

364 N.E.2d 278 (State ex rel. Dormody v. McClure) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McAuley v. Smith
729 N.E.2d 792 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1999)
State ex rel. Smith v. Court of Common Pleas
436 N.E.2d 1005 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1982)
State ex rel. Henry v. Britt
424 N.E.2d 297 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1981)
State ex rel. Smart v. McKinley
412 N.E.2d 393 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1980)
Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. Ferguson
399 N.E.2d 1206 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1980)