Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Pirman v. Money

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 20, 1994No. 93-2347PublishedCited by 146 opinions

1Per curiam

Pirman claims that she is entitled to mandamus and/or habeas corpus, alleging that the Eleventh District Court of Appeals acted improperly in setting bond based upon an unauthorized “no contact” condition, and that the appellate court acted without jurisdiction in rescinding her bond based upon such unauthorized condition. The court of appeals has filed a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The warden has filed a Civ.R. 12(C) motion for judgment on the pleadings.

The court of appeals’ Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion is improper for two…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Harris v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Peterson v. TeodosioOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Bennett v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & CorrectionOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. City of Akron v. RowlandOhio Supreme Court · 1993
  5. State ex rel. Horwitz v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by146 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Jackson v. McFaulOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Howard v. Catholic Social Services of Cuyahoga County, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Pegan v. CrawmerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Gaskins v. ShiplevyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Lemmon v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1997

141 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