Legal Opinion

State ex rel. City of Bedford v. Board of Elections

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1991No. 90-2123PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Per curiam

For a writ of mandamus to issue, Bedford must have a clear legal right to the performance of a clear legal duty and no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. State, ex rel. Brookpark Entertainment, Inc., v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections (1991), 60 Ohio St.3d 44, 45-46, 573 N.E.2d 596, 598-599. For the reasons that follow, we hold that Bedford is entitled, by virtue of the city’s powers of local self-government, to call the advisory election in dispute, that the board of elections and Secretary of State therefore have a clear legal duty to conduct the election, and that Bedford is…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Northern Ohio Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n v. City of ParmaOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State Ex Rel. Arey v. SherrillOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  3. State ex rel. Natalina Food Co. v. Ohio Civil Rights CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Billington v. CotnerOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  5. State ex rel. Polcyn v. BurkhartOhio Supreme Court · 1973

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Huebner v. West Jefferson Village CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Buckeye Community Hope Foundation v. City of Cuyahoga FallsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Morris v. City CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Paluf v. FeneliOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State ex rel. City of Toledo v. Lucas County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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