State ex rel. Town & Suburb Development Co. v. Maser

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Town & Suburb Development Co. v. Maser

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 505

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 20, 1961

DocketNo. 37029

StatusPublished

This text of 172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 505 (State ex rel. Town & Suburb Development Co. v. Maser) 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. Town & Suburb Development Co. v. Maser, 172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 505 (Ohio 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

By this proceeding in mandamus, relator is attempting to control the legislative discretion of the city council of Maple Heights in the exercise of its police power. A writ of mandamus may not be used to control legislative discretion. See State, ex rel. De Ville Photography, Inc., v. McCarroll, Judge, 167 Ohio St., 210.

The relator having failed to establish a clear legal duty on the part of respondents to perform the acts requested, the Court of Appeals was in error in allowing the writ. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and final judgment is rendered for respondents.

Judgment reversed.

Weyganbt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

By this proceeding in mandamus, relator is attempting to control the legislative discretion of the city council of Maple Heights in the exercise of its police power. A writ of mandamus may not be used to control legislative discretion. See State, ex rel. De Ville Photography, Inc., v. McCarroll, Judge, 167 Ohio St., 210.

The relator having failed to establish a clear legal duty on the part of respondents to perform the acts requested, the Court of Appeals was in error in allowing the writ. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and final judgment is rendered for respondents.

Judgment reversed.

Weyganbt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Bell, Herbert and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-town-suburb-development-co-v-maser-ohio-1961.