Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Gantt v. Coleman

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 13, 1983No. 82-1221PublishedCited by 84 opinions

1Per curiam

It is well-established that the extraordinary writ of mandamus “* * * will not issue to compel a public official to perform a legal duty which has been completed.” State, ex rel. Breaux, v. Court of Common Pleas (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 164 [4 O.O.3d 352], citing State, ex rel. Bowman, v. Asmann (1925), 113 Ohio St. 394. Stated otherwise, the writ will not lie in order to secure a determination of issues which have become moot pending consideration by the court of appeals. State, ex rel. Hawke, v. Weygandt (1947), 148 Ohio St. 453, 456 [36 O.O. 88]. See, also, State, ex rel. Warner & Swasey…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Breaux v. Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga CountyOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. State Ex Rel. Hawke v. WeygandtOhio Supreme Court · 1947
  3. State Ex Rel. Bowman v. AsmannOhio Supreme Court · 1925
  4. State ex rel. Warner & Swasey Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1977

3Cited by84 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Stamps v. Automatic Data Processing BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. State ex rel. Richardson v. GowdyOhio Supreme Court · 2023
  5. State ex rel. Pettway v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common PleasOhio Court of Appeals · 2013

79 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