State ex rel. Square v. Planning Commission of Madison
This text of 413 N.E.2d 825 (State ex rel. Square v. Planning Commission of Madison) 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.
Opinion
“In order to grant a writ of mandamus, a court must find that the relator has a clear right to the relief [129]*129prayed for, that the respondent is under a clear duty to perform the requested act, and that the relator has no plain and adequate remedy at law.” State, ex rel. Westchester, v. Bacon (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 42, 44. Relators have a plain and adequate remedy at law in the form of a declaratory judgment action. In P. H. English v. Koster (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 17, this court affirmed the trial court’s order that plats are approved by operation of law when a planning commission has failed to comply with its mandatory duty to approve or disapprove the preliminary and final plats within 30 days. P. H. English was brought as a declaratory judgment action.
Since relators have a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law, the judgment of the Court of Appeals denying the writ is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
413 N.E.2d 825, 64 Ohio St. 2d 128, 18 Ohio Op. 3d 362, 1980 Ohio LEXIS 845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-square-v-planning-commission-of-madison-ohio-1980.