Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Hickman v. Capots

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 20, 1989No. 89-521PublishedCited by 119 opinions

1Per curiam

Unsupported conclusions of a complaint are not considered admitted, Schulman v. Cleveland (1972), 30 Ohio St. 2d 196,198, 59 O.O. 2d 196,197, 283 N.E. 2d 175,176, and are not sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss. Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co. (1988), 40 Ohio St. 3d 190, 193, 532 N.E. 2d 753, 756. The cases cited by appellant, Mack v. McCune (C.A. 10, 1977), 551 F. 2d 251, and Robinson v. Benson (C.A. 10, 1978), 570 F. 2d 920, both indicate that the conclusion appellant pleaded below is an exception to the general rule that parole may be revoked even though criminal charges based on the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Robert Frederick Taylor v. United States Parole CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
  3. George E. Mack v. Gary McCune Warden, Federal Penitentiary, Leavenworth, and Maurice J. Sigler, Chairman, United States Board of ParoleCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1977
  4. Schulman v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Lee Autry Robinson v. C. L. Benson, Warden, Leavenworth Federal PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1978

3Cited by119 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Seikbert v. WilkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State ex rel. Edwards v. Toledo City School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Maternal Grandmother v. Hamilton Cty. Dept. of Job & Family Servs. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2021
  4. State ex rel. Edwards v. Toledo City School Dist. Bd. of Edn.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Carter v. WilkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994

114 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