Legal Opinion
Monaghan v. Richley
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1972No. 72-454PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
O’Neill, C. J,.
The issue presented in this appeal is whether relator is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing respondents to compensate him for the period of time during which he was wrongfully excluded from his employment.
Respondents urge that relator’s action is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity (Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution), and that mandamus does not lie for the recovery of back pay.
Whether mandamus lies for the recovery of back pay by a public employee is an issue which has been before *192this court on prior occasions in varying factual situations. In some…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Gordon v. BarthalowOhio Supreme Court · 1948
- State Ex Rel. Curtis v. DeCorpsOhio Supreme Court · 1938
- Williams v. State Ex Rel. GribbenOhio Supreme Court · 1933
- State Ex Rel. Bay v. WitterOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- State Ex Rel. White v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1936
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- State ex rel. Bush v. SpurlockOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- State ex rel. Fenske v. McGovernOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- State ex rel. Crockett v. RobinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- State ex rel. Bardo v. City of LyndhurstOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- State ex rel. Weiss v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.