State Ex Rel. Frye v. MacConkey

Ohio Supreme Court

State Ex Rel. Frye v. MacConkey

26 N.E.2d 457, 136 Ohio St. 462, 136 Ohio St. (N.S.) 462, 17 Ohio Op. 31, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 557

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 27, 1940

Docket28043

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 N.E.2d 457 (State Ex Rel. Frye v. MacConkey) 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. Frye v. MacConkey, 26 N.E.2d 457, 136 Ohio St. 462, 136 Ohio St. (N.S.) 462, 17 Ohio Op. 31, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 557 (Ohio 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

A writ of mandamus will not lie to control judicial discretion. Section 12285, Q-eneral Code.

A writ of prohibition cannot be invoked as a substitute for an appeal and will not be issued to prevent an anticipated erroneous judgment. State, ex rel. Norris, v. Hodapp, Judge, 135 Ohio St., 26, 18 N. E. (2d), 984, and authorities cited therein.

Demurrer to petition sustained and writs denied.

Writs denied.

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

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