State Ex Rel. Universal Realty Co. v. Brown
150 N.E. 755, 113 Ohio St. 698, 113 Ohio St. (N.S.) 698, 1925 Ohio LEXIS 254
Opinion
The court finds that the plaintiff is not entitled to a writ of mandamus as prayed for in the petition, for the reason that the transaction is one in which other persons are concerned and other interests involved, and the relief sought cannot be afforded by a writ of mandamus.
Writ denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State Ex Rel. Universal Realty Co. v. Brown, 150 N.E. 755, 113 Ohio St. 698, 113 Ohio St. (N.S.) 698, 1925 Ohio LEXIS 254 (Ohio 1925).
150 N.E. 755 (State Ex Rel. Universal Realty Co. v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State Ex Rel. Milton Banking Co. v. Merrell
196 N.E. 648 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1935)