State ex rel. McArthur v. DeSouza
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
It is settled that an action in quo warranto will not lie where there exists an adequate remedy by way of appeal. State ex rel. Steyer v. Szabo (1962), 174 Ohio St. 109, 21 O.O.2d 366, 186 N.E.2d 839; State ex rel. Hanley v. Roberts (1985), 17 Ohio St.3d 1, 17 OBR 1, 476 N.E.2d 1019. Respondents claim that the commission’s certification of the promotional eligibility list on June 21, 1990 effectively denied relator’s protest, and that relator’s proper remedy was to appeal that determination under R.C. 2506.01. That statute provides that “[e]very final order, adjudication, or decision of any *…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Fortner v. ThomasOhio Supreme Court · 1970
- M. J. Kelley Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- State ex rel. Bardo v. City of LyndhurstOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- State ex rel. Hanley v. RobertsOhio Supreme Court · 1985
- DeLong v. Board of Education of Southwest School DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 1973
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Lakota Local School District Board of Education v. BricknerOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
- State ex rel. Zeigler v. ZumbarOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State ex rel. Brenders v. HallOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State ex rel. Johnson v. TalikkaOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State Ex Rel. Hilltop Basic Resources, Inc. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.