Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Borsuk v. City of Cleveland

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1972No. 71-168PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephenson, J.

Appellants assert, in substance, that the court below erred in issuing the writ of mandamus for *227the reason that relator did not show a clear right to the relief sought.

This assertion is supported by an argument that since the Common Pleas Court held, in the appeal by respondents from the Civil Service Commission order, that the court had no jurisdiction of the appeal, the court should have dismissed the appeal and was without authority to order reinstatement. It is then argued that since the judgment could go no further than to order a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, the Civil Service…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. City of Cleveland ex rel. Neelon v. LocherOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  2. National Tube Co. v. AyresOhio Supreme Court · 1949
  3. State ex rel. Prayner v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  4. State Ex Rel. Brophy v. CrawfordOhio Supreme Court · 1934

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Hal Artz Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  2. State ex rel. Weiss v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Cincinnati School District Board of Education v. Hamilton County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Superior Metal Products, Inc. v. Administrator, Ohio Bureau of Employment ServicesOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  5. State ex rel. Gatlin v. Yellow Freight System, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985

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