Silliman v. Court of Common Pleas
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWeygandt, C. J.
The single question here presented is whether the allegations of plaintiff’s petition state properly pleaded facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for invoking the writ of prohibition.
It is necessary to keep in mind the exact nature of this remedy. Although it is a common-law writ of high antiquity prohibition came into Ohio jurisprudence through the constitutional amendments of 1912. As frequently stated by the text-writers its principal purpose is to prevent an inferior court or other tribunal from assuming a jurisdiction with which it is not legally vested. On page 5 of 22…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Carmody v. JusticeOhio Supreme Court · 1926
- State Ex Rel. Thomas v. HendersonOhio Supreme Court · 1931
3Cited by28 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Miller v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1949
- State Ex Rel. Talaba v. MorelandOhio Supreme Court · 1936
- State Ex Rel. Caley v. Tax CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1934
- State Ex Rel. Levy v. SavordOhio Supreme Court · 1944
- State Ex Rel. Norris v. HodappOhio Supreme Court · 1939
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.