State ex rel. Stern v. Mascio
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Judge Mascio asserts that the court of appeals erred in granting the prosecuting attorney the requested writ of prohibition. In order to be entitled to a writ of prohibition, the prosecuting attorney is required to establish (1) that Judge Mascio was about to exercise judicial power, (2) that Judge Mascio’s exercise of such power was unauthorized by law, and (3) that refusal of the writ would cause the prosecuting attorney injury for which he has no other adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. State ex rel. Thurn v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 289, 291, 649…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- City of Cuyahoga Falls v. BowersOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- State ex rel. Thurn v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. WaddellOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State ex rel. Yates v. Court of AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- State v. GilboOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by66 opinions
- State v. BirdOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State v. DrainOhio Supreme Court · 2022
- State v. SimsOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- State v. MuslehOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- Shie v. LeonardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.