Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Litty v. Leskovyansky

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1996No. 96-1482PublishedCited by 71 opinions

1Per curiam

In her various propositions of law, relator asserts that she is entitled to extraordinary relief in prohibition. In order for a writ of prohibition to issue, relator must establish that (1) Judge Leskovyansky is about to exercise judicial power, (2) the exercise of such power is unauthorized by law, and (3) if the writ is denied, relator will suffer injury for which no other adequate remedy exists. State ex rel. Barclays Bank PLC v. Hamilton Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 536, 540, 660 N.E.2d 458, 461.

Judge Leskovyansky initially contends that relator has not established the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Fogle v. SteinerOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State ex rel. Barclays Bank PLC v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Newton v. Court of ClaimsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Dentsply International, Inc. v. KostasOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. State ex rel. Tollis v. Court of AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by71 opinions

  1. Bobb Forest Products, Inc. v. Morbark Industries, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2002
  2. State ex rel. Rogers v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State ex rel. Sartini v. YostOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State ex rel. Kaylor v. BrueningOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Stern v. MascioOhio Supreme Court · 1998

66 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