Legal Opinion

State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 18, 1942No. 28858PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The first contention made by the respondents is that this action is essentially one for injunction, wherein this court does not have original jurisdiction.

In our opinion, the decision of this question is determinative of the case. The relator avers that "unlessrestrained by this court, said defendants will continue to make such payments" and asks the court to command "them to cease disbursing from the state insurance fund," etc. (Italics ours.)

Section 1465-59, General Code, provides that the moneys contributed by the employers named in Section 1465-60, subdivision 1, General Code, those being…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Juhlman v. ConnersOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Public Service Commission v. Kansas Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1926

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Ass'n for Defense of Washington Local School District v. KigerOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State Ex Rel. Karmasu v. TateOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. State ex rel. Zupancic v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. ShewardOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State ex rel. Stamps v. Automatic Data Processing BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1989

22 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