State ex rel. Nozik v. Ford

664 N.E.2d 536, 75 Ohio St. 3d 1483
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1996·No. 96-1061·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of prohibition. Upon consideration of relator’s motion for issuance of an alternative writ,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for issuance of an alternative writ be, and hereby is, denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.

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

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

State ex rel. Nozik v. Ford, 664 N.E.2d 536, 75 Ohio St. 3d 1483 (Ohio 1996).

664 N.E.2d 536 (State ex rel. Nozik v. Ford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown
789 N.E.2d 210 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2003)