Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Lanham v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1997No. Nos. 97-1358, 97-1393, 97-1398, 97-1402, 97-1415, 97-1447, 97-1460, 97-1494, 97-1568, 97-1717 and 97-1745PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Per curiam

S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5) provides that in original actions other than habeas corpus filed here, “[a]fter the time for filing an answer or a motion to dismiss, the Supreme Court will either dismiss the case or issue an alternative or peremptory writ, if a writ has not already been issued.” Dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is appropriate if, after all factual allegations of the complaint are presumed true and all reasonable inferences are made in relators’ favor, it appears beyond doubt that relators can prove no set of facts warranting relief.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  3. State ex rel. Crabtree v. Franklin County Board of HealthOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State ex rel. Findlay Publishing Co. v. SchroederOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State ex rel. Hattie v. GoldhardtOhio Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Morgan v. City of New LexingtonOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Clark v. ConnorOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State ex rel. Woods v. Oak Hill Community Medical Center, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. State ex rel. Kerner v. State Teachers Retirement BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State ex rel. Lanham v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997

48 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