State ex rel. Hughes v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
For the reasons to follow we uphold the denial of the writ of mandamus.
Relator is required to show a clear legal right to the relief sought and a clear legal duty on the part of the commission to provide the relief in order for this court to issue a writ of mandamus. State, ex rel. Pressley, v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St. 2d 141 [40 O.O.2d 141]; State, ex rel. Elliott, v. Indus. Comm. (1986), 26 Ohio St. 3d 76. To show the clear legal right, relator must demonstrate that the commission abused its discretion by entering an order unsupported by some evidence in the record. State, ex rel.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
- State ex rel. Teece v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- State ex rel. Elliott v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- State ex rel. Wallace v. Industrlal CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- State ex rel. Anderson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- State ex rel. Eberhardt v. Flxible Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Rouch v. Eagle Tool & Machine Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
- State ex rel. Lampkins v. Dayton Malleable, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
- State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. StoverOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- State ex rel. Bennett v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.