Williams v. Bowman, Unpublished Decision (4-10-2002)
This text of Williams v. Bowman, Unpublished Decision (4-10-2002) (Williams v. Bowman, Unpublished Decision (4-10-2002)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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
A writ of procedendo will not issue unless the relator establishes a clear legal right to that relief and that there is no adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Brown v. Shoemaker (1988),
In this case, relator alleges that respondent has not ruled on his "Motion for Jail Time Credit," filed on July 10, 2001. Respondent answered that the motion had, in fact, already been ruled upon, providing a copy of the judgment entry filed stamped August 10, 2001. Therefore, we conclude that relator has already been given the relief sought.
Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of procedendo is dismissed. Court costs of the action are assessed to relator.
WRIT DISMISSED.
Peter M. Handwork, J., James R. Sherck, J., and Mark L. Pietrykowski,P.J., CONCUR.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Williams v. Bowman, Unpublished Decision (4-10-2002), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-bowman-unpublished-decision-4-10-2002-ohioctapp-2002.