Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Hanrahan v. Zupnik

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 17, 1954No. Nos. 33553, 33554, 33555 and 33556Published

1Opinion of the CourtMiddleton, J.

The only error assigned in this court is that the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the judgments of the Court of Common Pleas allowing the writs of mandamus.

Three principal questions are debated. They are the significance of the statutes which became effective May 26,1937, commonly referred to as the vested right statutes; the effect of the comprehensive revision of the pennon laws effected by the statutes enacted in 1947, and the right of the relators in any event to relief in mandamus.

In February 1937 the General Assembly enacted Section 4612-1, General Code (117 Ohio Laws, 29), relating…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Dieckroegger v. ConnersOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  2. State Ex Rel. Schoedinger v. LentzOhio Supreme Court · 1936
  3. State Ex Rel. Lemperle v. McIntoshOhio Supreme Court · 1945
  4. State Ex Rel. Eden v. KundtsOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  5. State Ex Rel. Little v. CarterOhio Supreme Court · 1924

1 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