Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. Atkinson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1941No. 28376PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.

The controlling question raised by the general demurrer to the petition is: Did The Cleveland Railway Company, the relator herein, have an adequate remedy by way of appeal from a decision of the administrator on its application with respect to seasonal and casual employment?

If the right of appeal existed the relator is not entitled to a writ of mandamus on the facts alleged in the petition and the general demurrer thereto should be sustained.

The determination of the question of appealability requires the especial consideration of certain statutory provisions: (a) Section 1345-29, General Code…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Industrial Commission v. VailOhio Supreme Court · 1924
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1939
  3. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1934

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Kunkler v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Hallworth v. Republic Steel Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1950
  3. City of Toledo v. JenkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  4. State Ex Rel. City of Grand Island v. Union Pacific RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1950
  5. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1941

11 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