Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1995No. 95-865PublishedCited by 99 opinions

1Per curiam

In order to dismiss a complaint under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, it must appear beyond doubt from the complaint, after all factual allegations are presumed true and all reasonable inferences are made in favor of the relator/plaintiff, that the relator/plaintiff can prove no set of facts warranting relief. State ex rel. Williams Ford Sales, Inc. v. Connor (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 111, 113, 647 N.E.2d 804, 806. In order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, Dehler had the burden to establish a clear legal right to the requested acts, a corresponding…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Seikbert v. WilkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State ex rel. Sherrills v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State ex rel. Levin v. City of Sheffield LakeOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Fain v. Summit County Adult Probation DepartmentOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Nichols v. Cuyahoga County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental DisabilitiesOhio Supreme Court · 1995

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by99 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Miley v. ParrottOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Watkins v. Eighth District Court of AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. In re DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State ex rel. Penland v. Dinkelacker (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  5. State ex rel. Watkins v. Eighth Dist. Court of AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1998

94 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API