Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Mayes v. Holman

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1996No. 96-395PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Per curiam

Mayes claims that the court of appeals erred in entering summary judgment in favor of Holman and that he is entitled to a writ of mandamus compelling the release of the requested record. Civ.R. 56(C) provides that before summary judgment may be granted, it must be determined that (1) no genuine issue as to any material fact remains to be litigated, (2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and (3) it appears from the evidence that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion, and viewing such evidence most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, that conclusion is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Zimmerman v. TompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Parsons v. FlemingOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State ex rel. Steckman v. JacksonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Master v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State ex rel. Nelson v. FuerstOhio Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Wadd v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State ex rel. WLWT-TV5 v. LeisOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State ex rel. Warren v. WarnerOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State ex rel. White v. GoldsberryOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State ex rel. Iacovone v. KaminskiOhio Supreme Court · 1998

21 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