State ex rel. Laramie Corp. v. City of Cleveland

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Laramie Corp. v. City of Cleveland

419 N.E.2d 1, 65 Ohio St. 2d 35, 19 Ohio Op. 3d 227, 1981 Ohio LEXIS 440

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 18, 1981

DocketNo. 80-1029

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 419 N.E.2d 1 (State ex rel. Laramie Corp. v. City of Cleveland) 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. Laramie Corp. v. City of Cleveland, 419 N.E.2d 1, 65 Ohio St. 2d 35, 19 Ohio Op. 3d 227, 1981 Ohio LEXIS 440 (Ohio 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, which will not be granted if relator has a plain and adequate remedy at law. State, ex rel. Square, v. Planning Comm. (1980), 64 Ohio St. 2d 128; State, ex rel. Westchester, v. Bacon (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 42.

Appellant in the instant cause has a plain and adequate remedy at law by way of appeal from the decision of the Cleveland Municipal Court. Indeed, appellant is presently taking advantage of that remedy, having appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals, where it is now pending. Accordingly, the writ must be denied. State, ex rel. Pressley, v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St. 2d 141.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Celebrezze, C. J., W. Brown, P. Brown, Stephenson, Locher, Holmes and C. Brown, JJ., concur. Stephenson, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting for Sweeney, J.

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