Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Bassman v. Earhart

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 17, 1985No. 83-1806PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

It is well-established that “[i]n order for a writ of mandamus to issue, this court must find that relator has a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, that respondent is under a clear legal duty to perform the requested act, and that relator has no plain and adequate remedy at law.” State, ex rel. Heller, v. Miller (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 6, 7 [15 O.O.3d 3]; State, ex rel. Berger, v. McMonagle (1983), 6 Ohio St. 3d 28, 29, certiorari denied (1983),_U.S._, 78 L. Ed. 2d 723; State, ex rel. Bd. of Commrs., v. Weir (1983), 6 Ohio St. 3d 381, 383-384.

In relation to the existence of an…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagleOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State ex rel. Heller v. MillerOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Davis v. State Personnel Bd. of ReviewOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Harris v. LewisOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Ebert v. Stark County Board of Mental RetardationOhio Supreme Court · 1980

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Harden v. GeneralOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Hiram House v. Industrial CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. State, Ex Rel. LanFranchi v. Summit County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental DisabilitiesOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. State Ex Rel. Luchette v. PasquerillaOhio Court of Appeals · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API