Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Wolfe v. Close

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1990No. 89-2035PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

A common element for issuance of a writ of prohibition and writ of mandamus is that the relator have no adequate legal remedy. State, ex rel. GMS Management Co., v. Callahan (1989), 45 Ohio St. 3d 51, 543 N.E. 2d 483; State, ex rel. Smith, v. Avellone (1987), 31 Ohio St. 3d 6, 31 *269OBR 5, 508 N.E. 2d 162. We find that Wolfe has an adequate remedy and hereby grant the motion for summary judgment.

Wolfe claims that since he was never a party to the nuisance action, sanctions such as the tax and padlocking cannot be enforced against him or his property, particularly when he has ousted the tenant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. GMS Management Co. v. CallahanOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State ex rel. Smith v. AvelloneOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  3. State, Ex Rel. v. Bd. of Edn.Ohio Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hunt v. Westlake City School District Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Pizza v. SmithLucas County Court of Common Pleas · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API