Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Rose Hill Burial Park v. Moser

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 7, 1982No. 82-103PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue presented herein is whether a writ of prohibition should issue to prevent respondent from proceeding further in the appropriation action presently pending in his court.

Generally, relator contends that prohibition will lie because there is a total want of jurisdiction on the part of respondent in the cause. Specifically, relator’s argument is two-pronged. First, relator argues that R.C. 1721.01 authorizes appropriation only where there are no graves in the area sought to be appropriated. Thus, according to relator, once the existence of such a grave is established, there is no…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. McKee v. CooperOhio Supreme Court · 1974
  2. State ex rel. Crebs v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1974
  3. State ex rel. Bell v. BlairOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  4. State ex rel. Susi v. FlowersOhio Supreme Court · 1975

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagleOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State ex rel. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority v. GuzzoOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. State ex rel. Chillicothe Gazette, Inc. v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. State Ex Rel. Cosmos Broadcasting Corp. v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. State ex rel. Hardesty v. WilliamsonOhio Supreme Court · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API