State ex rel. Elyria Foundry Co. v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Appellees successfully argued below that mandamus was inappropriate. We affirm the denial of the writ, but do so for a reason other than that given by the court of appeals.
We find that the controversy presented by EFC’s mandamus action lacks ripeness. Ripeness “is peculiarly a question of timing.” Regional Rail Reorganization Act Cases (1974), 419 U.S. 102, 140, 95 S.Ct. 335, 357, 42 L.Ed.2d 320, 351. The ripeness doctrine is motivated in part by the desire “to prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature’ adjudication, from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements over…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Regional Rail Reorganization Act CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
3Cited by73 opinions
- State v. DelvallieOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
- State v. Maddox (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2022
- State v. WolfeOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
- State of Ohio Ex Rel. Boggs v. City of ClevelandCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- State v. MaddoxOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.