State v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (3-25-1999)
This text of State v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (3-25-1999) (State v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (3-25-1999)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In order for this court to issue a writ of mandamus, the relator must establish each prong of the following three-part test: 1) the relator possesses a clear legal right to the relief requested; 2) the respondent possesses a clear legal duty to perform the requested act; and 3) the relator possesses no plain and adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Carter v. Wilkinson
(1994),
Accordingly, we grant the respondents motion for summary judgment. Costs to relator.
Writ denied.
ANN DYKE, J., CONCURS.
JAMES M. PORTER, ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (3-25-1999), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-court-of-common-pleas-unpublished-decision-3-25-1999-ohioctapp-1999.