Legal Opinion

Smith v. Walker

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 28, 1998No. 98-1036PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Per curiam

Smith asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his petition based on the in forma pauperis requirements set forth in R.C. 2969.25 for inmates filing civil actions against a government entity or employee. Smith’s assertion lacks merit because even if the court of appeals’ rationale was incorrect, dismissal was warranted for the following reasons. See State ex rel. The V Cos. v. Marshall (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 467, 474, 692 N.E.2d 198, 204, fn. 1.

First, Smith had adequate remedies at law by appeal or postconviction relief to review the alleged…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State ex rel. V Companies v. MarshallOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State ex rel. Alford v. WintersOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Majoros v. CollinsOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. State ex rel. Crigger v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State ex rel. Massie v. RogersOhio Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Watkins v. CollinsOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Heddleston v. MackOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State ex rel. Jaffal v. CalabreseOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  4. State ex rel. White v. GoldsberryOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Jimison v. WilsonOhio Supreme Court · 2005

12 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