State ex rel. Lee v. Montgomery
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Lee asserts that the court of appeals erred in denying the requested writ of mandamus. Lee’s preeminent claim is for a writ of mandamus to compel the Attorney General to “take such action as is necessary * * * to resolve the matter of identifying the rest of the members of the ‘class of beneficiaries’ ” of the charitable trust. Lee contends that the Attorney General has a clear legal duty to bring an action to define the other beneficiaries of the trust besides Miami University. Lee further contends that the Attorney General has a clear legal duty to move to vacate the probate court judgment…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State ex rel. Crabtree v. Franklin County Board of HealthOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. First New Shiloh Baptist Church v. MeagherOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. Sampson v. ParrottOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- In re the Trust U/W of BrookeOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. Evans v. Columbus Department of LawOhio Supreme Court · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State ex rel. Husted v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2009
- State Ex Rel. Widmar v. Mohney, 2007-G-2776 (3-7-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State ex rel. Commt. for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 3543-00 v. WhiteOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- State ex rel. AWMS Water Solutions, L.L.C. v. SimmersOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
- State ex rel. Lee v. MontgomeryOhio Supreme Court · 2000
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.