State ex rel. Cities Service Oil Co. v. Orteca

Appellants initially contend that the Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to entertain appellee’s “Motion for Supplemental Order.” We have held, however, that “[t]he power of a court to enforce its own proper orders is fundamental and inherent, as well as constitutional; necessarily so, to give it standing and afford respect and obedience to its judgment. This is upon the broad ground of public policy, and without which power the judicial edifice would fall.” Wind v. State (1921), 102 Ohio St. 62, 64. We are of the opinion that the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to entertain this action…