State ex rel. May v. Cissell

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. May v. Cissell

73 Ohio St. 3d 46

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided August 9, 1995·No. Nos. 95-546 and 95-547·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[47]*47The judgments of the court of appeals dismissing the complaints for writs of mandamus are affirmed on the basis that appellant possesses an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to correct the trial court records via App.R. 9(E). See State ex rel. Howard v. Ferreri (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 587, 592, 639 N.E.2d 1189, 1194-1195, and cases cited therein.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

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

[47]*47The judgments of the court of appeals dismissing the complaints for writs of mandamus are affirmed on the basis that appellant possesses an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to correct the trial court records via App.R. 9(E). See State ex rel. Howard v. Ferreri (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 587, 592, 639 N.E.2d 1189, 1194-1195, and cases cited therein.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. May v. Cissell, 73 Ohio St. 3d 46 (Ohio 1995).

Pincite

73 Ohio St. 3d 46 (State ex rel. May v. Cissell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related