State Ex Rel. Rice v. Matthews

Ohio Supreme Court

State Ex Rel. Rice v. Matthews

42 N.E.2d 163, 140 Ohio St. 23, 140 Ohio St. (N.S.) 23, 23 Ohio Op. 227, 1942 Ohio LEXIS 398

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMay 27, 1942

Docket29103

StatusPublished

This text of 42 N.E.2d 163 (State Ex Rel. Rice v. Matthews) 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. Rice v. Matthews, 42 N.E.2d 163, 140 Ohio St. 23, 140 Ohio St. (N.S.) 23, 23 Ohio Op. 227, 1942 Ohio LEXIS 398 (Ohio 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Relatrix relies upon Section 6, Article IY of the Constitution, and contends it was the mandatory duty of the respondents “by virtue of Sections 12223-21 and 12223-30, G-eneral Code, and said constitutional provision, to retry the case, and to prepare, render and cause to be entered, a decision therein by opinion and entry, because the same was appealed to it for a trial de novo.”

The extraordinary writ of mandamus may not be employed as a substitute for appeal. 25 Ohio Jurisprudence, 1013, Section 34; State, ex rel. Barner, v. Marsh, Clerk, 120 Ohio St., 222, 165 N. E., 843.

The demurrer to the amended petition is sustained and a writ of mandamus is denied.

Writ denied.

Weygandt, C. J., Turner, Williams, Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman and Bettman, JJ., concur.

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