State ex rel. Wetecamp v. Brown
This text of 159 Ohio St. (N.S.) 172 (State ex rel. Wetecamp v. Brown) 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
The issuance of a writ of mandamus requiring the appointment as prayed for would be a vain thing, inasmuch, had Wetecamp been holding the office for such term, he would automatically have been retired on June 30, 1952, as required by Section 486-59, General Code, unless, upon approval of an application therefor, he had been “continued in service for a period of one year or any part thereof,” which the Secretary of State, as the appointing authority, refused to do.
The question involved, therefore, is moot. The petition is dismissed on authority of Miner v. Witt, City Clerk, 82 Ohio St., 237, 92 N. E., 21.
Petition dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
159 Ohio St. (N.S.) 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-wetecamp-v-brown-ohio-1953.