Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Rudes v. Rofkar

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1984No. Nos. 83-1828 and 84-530PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

In case No. 83-1828, appellants argue that a writ of mandamus ordering appropriations for 1983 is moot on January 1, 1984, and will not be enforced. It is appellants’ contention that such enforcement by this court would be a vain act.

Although the appellants may be technically correct, we agree with the appellee courts that a court, does not lose jurisdiction to determine the issues involving questions of great public interest. See Wick v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. (1932), 46 Ohio App. 253, and Overesch v. Campbell (1953), 95 Ohio App. 359 [53 O.O. 317].

With respect to the crucial issue…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Johnston v. TaulbeeOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State ex rel. Foster v. WittenbergOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  3. State ex rel. Durkin v. City Council of YoungstownOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. State ex rel. Giuliani v. PerkOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  5. State ex rel. Arbaugh v. Richland County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Franchise Developers, Inc. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State ex rel. Morley v. LordiOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  4. State ex rel. Avellone v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  5. State ex rel. Weaver v. Lake County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1991

9 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