State ex rel. Williams-Bey v. Taft

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Williams-Bey v. Taft

739 N.E.2d 815, 90 Ohio St. 3d 1489, 2000 Ohio LEXIS 3145

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 20, 2000

Docket00-1864

StatusPublished

This text of 739 N.E.2d 815 (State ex rel. Williams-Bey v. Taft) 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. Williams-Bey v. Taft, 739 N.E.2d 815, 90 Ohio St. 3d 1489, 2000 Ohio LEXIS 3145 (Ohio 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In Mandamus and Procedendo. On motion to dismiss, motion for the determination of material falsity, motion to substitute relator David Turner, motion to strike motion to dismiss and motion for determination of material falsity, and motion for appointment of counsel. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed. All other motions are denied.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Cook, J., concurs in the denial of the motion for determination of material falsity for lack of authenticated supporting documentation. See Evid.R. 901. Douglas and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur' except that they would grant the motion for determination of material falsity.

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

In Mandamus and Procedendo. On motion to dismiss, motion for the determination of material falsity, motion to substitute relator David Turner, motion to strike motion to dismiss and motion for determination of material falsity, and motion for appointment of counsel. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed. All other motions are denied.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Cook, J., concurs in the denial of the motion for determination of material falsity for lack of authenticated supporting documentation. See Evid.R. 901. Douglas and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur' except that they would grant the motion for determination of material falsity.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

739 N.E.2d 815, 90 Ohio St. 3d 1489, 2000 Ohio LEXIS 3145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-williams-bey-v-taft-ohio-2000.