State Ex Rel. Lagedrost v. Beightler

21 N.E.2d 992, 135 Ohio St. 624, 135 Ohio St. (N.S.) 624, 14 Ohio Op. 542, 1939 Ohio LEXIS 270
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 5, 1939
Docket27532
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 21 N.E.2d 992 (State Ex Rel. Lagedrost v. Beightler) 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. Lagedrost v. Beightler, 21 N.E.2d 992, 135 Ohio St. 624, 135 Ohio St. (N.S.) 624, 14 Ohio Op. 542, 1939 Ohio LEXIS 270 (Ohio 1939).

Opinion

By the Court.

The issue presented in this case is made by demurrer to the petition filed in this court. The pertinent facts may be stated as follows:

The relator was, on September 8, 1938, appointed by the then Director of Highways of the state to a position of truck driver and, upon taking a non-competitive examination, was so certified by the Civil Service Commission of the state. It is alleged that there then existed urgent reasons for filling a vacancy theretofore existing in such position, and the Civil Service Commission was unable to furnish a list of persons eligible for such appointment resulting from a competitive examination. It is further averred that the relator was appointed to such position by the Director of Highways “by provisional appointment that relator continued in such service until February 16, 1939, when he was notified by the resident division deputy director of highways of the discontinuance of his service; that thereupon another person was appointed to perform the duties theretofore required to be performed by the relator, which appointment was made without competitive examination; and that relator was not given an opportunity to take a competitive examination for such position. He seeks a *625 writ of mandamus requiring Ms restoration and reinstatement.

The demurrer to the petition is overruled and, respondent not desiring to plead further, a writ may issue on authority of State, ex rel. Slovensky, v. Taylor, Dir., ante, 601, this day decided.

Writ allowed.

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

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

Related

State, Ex Rel. Flittner v. Baldwin
162 N.E.2d 137 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1958)
State Ex Rel. Higgins v. George
70 N.E.2d 370 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1946)
State Ex Rel. Franz v. Taylor
27 N.E.2d 251 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1940)
State Ex Rel. Lynch v. Taylor
26 N.E.2d 207 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1940)
State, Ex Rel. v. Taylor, Dir.
24 N.E.2d 591 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1939)
State Ex Rel. Shehan v. Ohio Department of Liquor Control
23 N.E.2d 630 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 N.E.2d 992, 135 Ohio St. 624, 135 Ohio St. (N.S.) 624, 14 Ohio Op. 542, 1939 Ohio LEXIS 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-lagedrost-v-beightler-ohio-1939.