Legal Opinion
State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided November 29, 1939No. 27775PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Counsel for relator in his brief states that this action is based upon Section 871-38, General Code.
The demurrer will be sustained and a writ of mandamus denied.
Section 871-38, General Code, is inapplicable. Bowes v.Industrial Commission, 123 Ohio St. 155, 174 N.E. 357;State, ex rel. Nichols, v. Gregory et al., IndustrialCommission, 130 Ohio St. 165, 198 N.E. 182; U.S. Wall Paper Co. v. Industrial Commission, 132 Ohio St. 372,7 N.E.2d 798.
Mandamus is not a substitute for appeal. State, ex rel.Barner, v. Marsh, 120 Ohio St. 222, 165 N.E. 843.
The writ will issue to control discretion only where…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1934
- State Ex Rel. Armstrong v. DaveyOhio Supreme Court · 1935
- State Ex Rel. Nichols v. GregoryOhio Supreme Court · 1935
- Bowes v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1930
- State Ex Rel. Barner v. MarshOhio Supreme Court · 1929
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Sibarco Corp. v. City of BereaOhio Supreme Court · 1966
- Eugene E. Williams v. E. P. Perini, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977
- Eugene E. Williams v. E. P. Perini, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977