Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Kuczak v. Saffold

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 11, 1993No. 92-901PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

According to State ex rel. Westchester Estates, Inc. v. Bacon (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 42, 15 O.O.3d 53, 399 N.E.2d 81, paragraph one of the syllabus:

“In order to grant a writ of mandamus, a court must find that the relator has a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, that the respondent is under a clear legal duty to perform the requested act, and that relator has no plain and adequate remedy at law. (State ex rel. Harris v. Rhodes, 54 Ohio St.2d 41 [8 O.O.3d 36, 374 N.E.2d 641].)”

Under State ex rel. Tillimon v. Weiher (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 468, 605 N.E.2d 35, the court presumes the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Westchester Estates, Inc. v. BaconOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State ex rel. Harris v. RhodesOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State ex rel. Tillimon v. WeiherOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Village of Oakwood v. WuligerOhio Supreme Court · 1982

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Love v. Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's OfficeOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. State ex rel. Florence v. ZitterOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  3. State ex rel. Findlay Publishing Co. v. Hancock Cty. Bd. of Commrs.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Ohio v. ConninOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
  5. State ex rel. Love v. Cuyahoga Cty. Prosecutor's OfficeOhio Supreme Court · 1999

6 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