State ex rel. Gaylor, Inc. v. Goodenow

923 N.E.2d 624, 124 Ohio St. 3d 1525
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State ex rel. Gaylor, Inc. v. Goodenow. Read the opinion of the Court — 125 Ohio St. 3d 407
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 25, 2010·No. 2010-0330·Published

Opinion

In Mandamus and Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for writs of mandamus and prohibition. Upon consideration of respondents’ motion to require relator to give a bond and emergency motion for expedited briefing schedule,

It is ordered by the court that the motions are denied.

Pfeifer, J., dissents and would grant the motions. Cupp, J., would defer ruling on the motion for bond until relator files a response and would direct the parties to submit a proposed expedited briefing schedule.

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

State ex rel. Gaylor, Inc. v. Goodenow, 923 N.E.2d 624, 124 Ohio St. 3d 1525 (Ohio 2010).

923 N.E.2d 624 (State ex rel. Gaylor, Inc. v. Goodenow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.