Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Viox Builders, Inc. v. Lancaster

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 25, 1989No. 88-530PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

At issue is the commission’s interpretation of the terms “occupations” and “industries” as used in R.C. 4123.29 (now 4123.29[A]). Because an action for declaratory judgment can fully resolve this question, we find that a plain and adequate remedy at law exists and thus affirm the appellate court’s judgment.

To prevail in mandamus, relator must demonstrate that: (1) it has a clear right to the relief requested, (2) respondents are under a clear legal duty to perform the requested act, and (3) relator has no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State, ex rel. Westchester…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Westchester Estates, Inc. v. BaconOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State ex rel. Fenske v. McGovernOhio Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Manley v. Walsh (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State ex rel. Minutemen, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Harris v. Ohio Dep't of Veterans Servs.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2018
  4. State ex rel. Obetz v. StinzianoOhio Supreme Court · 2024
  5. State Ex Rel. Mosser Construction, Inc. v. City of ToledoOhio Court of Appeals · 1996

5 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