State ex rel. Toerner v. Common Pleas Court
277 N.E.2d 209, 28 Ohio St. 2d 213, 57 Ohio Op. 2d 439, 1971 Ohio LEXIS 395
Opinion
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed for the reason that the complaint for a writ of prohibition does not state a cause of action. Prohibition is not a substitute for appeal.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State ex rel. Toerner v. Common Pleas Court, 277 N.E.2d 209, 28 Ohio St. 2d 213, 57 Ohio Op. 2d 439, 1971 Ohio LEXIS 395 (Ohio 1971).
277 N.E.2d 209 (State ex rel. Toerner v. Common Pleas Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State ex rel. Hardesty v. Williamson
459 N.E.2d 552 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1984)
State ex rel. Shoop v. Mitrovich
448 N.E.2d 800 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1983)
DuBose v. Court of Common Pleas of Trumbull County
413 N.E.2d 1205 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1980)
State ex rel. Zakany v. Avellone
387 N.E.2d 1373 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1979)
State v. Ruppert
375 N.E.2d 1250 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1978)
State ex rel. Heimann v. George
344 N.E.2d 130 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1976)
State ex rel. Gilla v. Fellerhoff
338 N.E.2d 522 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1975)