Brooks v. Gaul
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Brooks claims that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his prohibition action. For the following reasons, this claim lacks merit.
In the absence of a patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction, a court having general subject-matter jurisdiction can determine its own jurisdiction, and a party challenging that jurisdiction has an adequate remedy at law by appeal. Page v. Riley (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 621, 623, 710 N.E.2d 690, 692. Prohibition will not issue as a substitute for appeal to review mere errors in judgment. Berthelot v. Dezso (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 257, 259, 714 N.E.2d 888, 890.
Ther…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Page v. RileyOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Berthelot v. DezsoOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Smith v. MitchellOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. Jackson v. CallahanOhio Supreme Court · 1999
3Cited by17 opinions
- State ex rel. Hummel v. SadlerOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- State ex rel. Hummel v. SadlerOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- Agee v. RussellOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State ex rel. Key v. SpicerOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State ex rel. Nalls v. RussoOhio Supreme Court · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.