Legal Opinion

Brooks v. Gaul

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 2000No. 99-2136PublishedCited by 17 opinions

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

  1. Page v. RileyOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Berthelot v. DezsoOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Smith v. MitchellOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. State ex rel. Jackson v. CallahanOhio Supreme Court · 1999

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Hummel v. SadlerOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State ex rel. Hummel v. SadlerOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Agee v. RussellOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. State ex rel. Key v. SpicerOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. State ex rel. Nalls v. RussoOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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