State ex rel. Nadlin v. Somers

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Nadlin v. Somers

174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 273

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 13, 1963

DocketNo. 37599

StatusPublished

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

Pincite

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-nadlin-v-somers-ohio-1963.