State ex rel. Sturgell v. Fais

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Sturgell v. Fais

357 N.E.2d 1081, 48 Ohio St. 2d 183, 2 Ohio Op. 3d 378, 1976 Ohio LEXIS 732

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 15, 1976

DocketNo. 76-706

StatusPublished

This text of 357 N.E.2d 1081 (State ex rel. Sturgell v. Fais) 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. Sturgell v. Fais, 357 N.E.2d 1081, 48 Ohio St. 2d 183, 2 Ohio Op. 3d 378, 1976 Ohio LEXIS 732 (Ohio 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent argues that the complaint herein makes no specific averment that relator was indigent at the time the motion for a transcript was made. However, the uneontroverted facts set forth in this cause do not permit a judgment for respondent on that basis.

Respondent contends further that an appeal must be pending to require a transcript at state expense. However, this court has determined that an indigent is entitled to a transcript at public expense if he is within rule at the time of such request. See State, ex rel. Catlino, v. Clerk of Courts (1967), 9 Ohio St. 2d 101; State, ex rel. Partee, v. McMahon (1963), 175 Ohio St. 243, 248.

The request being timely made herein, relator’s motion for summary judgment is sustained and the writ prayed for is allowed.

Writ allowed.

O’Neill, C. J., HeebeRT, Corrigan, Steen, Celebeezze, W. Brown and P. Beoavn, JJ., concur.

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