Legal Opinion

Evans v. Klaeger

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1999No. 99-1313PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Evans asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus action. For the following reasons, Evans’s assertion is meritless.

Habeas corpus relief is the exception rather than the general rule in child custody actions, and the writ will ordinarily be denied if there is an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. Pegan v. Crawmer (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 97, 99, 666 N.E.2d 1091, 1094. Evans is not entitled to the writ because he has or had an adequate legal remedy by appealing the trial court’s permanent allocation of parental rights in his divorce action. See, e.g.,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pegan v. CrawmerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. McGinty v. Cleveland City School District BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State ex rel. Thompson v. SponOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Holloway v. Clermont County Department of Human ServicesOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Forsyth v. BrignerOhio Supreme Court · 1999

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Chari v. VoreOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State ex rel. Dillery v. IcsmanOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Moore v. GoellerOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Chari v. VoreOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. State ex rel. Mackey v. BlackwellOhio Supreme Court · 2005

5 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