Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Murr v. Meyer

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1987No. 87-454PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant contends that appellee has a clear legal duty to prosecute the witness for falsification and that failure to do so is an abuse of discretion. We disagree.

Appellant states that he filed a criminal complaint against the witness charging falsification, that the complaint was dismissed for lack of probable cause, and that on appeal, the court of appeals dismissed the appeal. Appellant contends (1) that appellee has a clear legal duty to prosecute a complaint that two courts have found to lack probable cause and (2) that failure to do so is an abuse of discretion. Doubtless, a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Peek v. MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1970

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Master v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Ohio Ass'n of Public School Employees v. Dayton City School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. State ex rel. Portage Lakes Edn. Assn., OEA/NEA v. State Emp. Relations Bd.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State ex rel. Brown v. Nusbaum (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017
  5. State ex rel. Squire v. TaftOhio Supreme Court · 1994

16 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