State ex rel. Long v. Cardington Village Council

2001 Ohio 1888, 93 Ohio St. 3d 1230

Opinion

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 93 Ohio St.3d 1230.]

THE STATE EX REL. LONG v. COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF CARDINGTON ET AL.

[Cite as State ex rel. Long v. Cardington Village Council, 2001-Ohio-1888.] Mandamus—Application for attorney fees and costs—Relator awarded attorney fees and a refund in costs—Relator’s request for additional attorney fees denied.

(No. 00-857—Submitted October 30, 2001—Decided December 12, 2001.)

IN MANDAMUS.

ON APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEY FEES and COSTS.

__________________

{¶ 1} On relator’s application for attorney fees and costs and relator’s submission of evidence in support of application, relator is awarded $17,623.75 in attorney fees and a refund of $140 in costs (security deposit and docket fees). Relator’s request for additional attorney fees is denied.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., concur.

LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissents.

__________________

LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} I did not agree with the majority’s decision to grant a writ of mandamus because I believed that the relator had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law under R.C. 121.22(I)(1). See State ex rel. Long v. Cardington Village Council (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 54, 61-63, 748 N.E.2d 58, 65- 67 (Lundberg Stratton, J., dissenting). Consequently, I do not agree that she is entitled to recover her costs and attorney fees. Therefore, I must respectfully dissent.

__________________

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Alden, Taylor & Durkin, L.L.C., Randolph W. Alden, Kevin Durkin and James R. Taylor, for relator.

Manos, Martin, Pergram & Dietz, L.P.A., Dennis L. Pergram and James M.

Dietz, for respondents.

__________________