State ex rel. Grinnell v. Mitchell

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Grinnell v. Mitchell

1997 Ohio 218, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1209

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 30, 1997

Docket1997-0131

StatusPublished

This text of 1997 Ohio 218 (State ex rel. Grinnell v. Mitchell) 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. Grinnell v. Mitchell, 1997 Ohio 218, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1209 (Ohio 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 78 Ohio St.3d 1209.]

THE STATE EX REL. GRINNELL v. MITCHELL, JUDGE. [Cite as State ex rel. Grinnell v. Mitchell, 1997-Ohio-218.] Motion to dismiss granted. (No. 97-131—Submitted March 18, 1997—Decided April 30, 1997.) IN PROCEDENDO. ON MOTION TO DISMISS. __________________ Timothy Grinnell, pro se. Mark E. Piepmeier, Special Prosecuting Attorney, and William E. Breyer, Assistant Special Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent. __________________ {¶ 1} The motion to dismiss is granted. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and, JJ., concur. LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concurs separately. __________________ LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concurring. {¶ 2} I concur in the order of dismissal. Although we are not directing the lower court to take immediate action in this matter, I strongly urge the trial count to take note that relator’s motion has been pending for nearly one year and to make the utmost effort to expeditiously rule on this motion. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 78 Ohio St.3d 1209.]

THE STATE EX REL. GRINNELL v. MITCHELL, JUDGE. [Cite as State ex rel. Grinnell v. Mitchell, 1997-Ohio-218.] Motion to dismiss granted. (No. 97-131—Submitted March 18, 1997—Decided April 30, 1997.) IN PROCEDENDO. ON MOTION TO DISMISS. __________________ Timothy Grinnell, pro se. Mark E. Piepmeier, Special Prosecuting Attorney, and William E. Breyer, Assistant Special Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent. __________________ {¶ 1} The motion to dismiss is granted. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and, JJ., concur. LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concurs separately. __________________ LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concurring. {¶ 2} I concur in the order of dismissal. Although we are not directing the lower court to take immediate action in this matter, I strongly urge the trial count to take note that relator’s motion has been pending for nearly one year and to make the utmost effort to expeditiously rule on this motion. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1997 Ohio 218, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-grinnell-v-mitchell-ohio-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack