State ex rel. Nadlin v. Somers

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Nadlin v. Somers

174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 273

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 13, 1963·No. No. 37599·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petition does not set forth facts indicating that respondents are required to perform any specific duty imposed upon them by law and therefore does not state a cause of action in mandamus. Relator’s motion is overruled, respondents’ motion to dismiss is sustained, and judgment denying the writ is rendered accordingly.

Writ denied.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Griffith, Herbert and Gibson, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

The petition does not set forth facts indicating that respondents are required to perform any specific duty imposed upon them by law and therefore does not state a cause of action in mandamus. Relator’s motion is overruled, respondents’ motion to dismiss is sustained, and judgment denying the writ is rendered accordingly.

Writ denied.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Griffith, Herbert and Gibson, JJ., concur.

State ex rel. Nadlin v. Somers, 174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 273 (Ohio 1963).

Pincite

174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 273 (State ex rel. Nadlin v. Somers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.