Legal Opinion

Worrell v. Court of Common Pleas

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 22, 1994No. 93-2293PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

“For a writ of prohibition to issue, a relator must establish (1) that the court or officer against whom the writ is sought is about to exercise judicial or quasi-judicial power, (2) that the exercise of that power is unauthorized by law, and (3) that denying the writ will result in injury for which no other adequate remedy exists in the ordinary course of law.” State ex rel. Ruessman v. Flanagan (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 464, 465, 605 N.E.2d 31, 33. The parties agree that the common pleas court was about to exercise judicial power in considering the merits of Walker’s complaint. Accordingly, the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Conley v. ShearerOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State ex rel. Sanquily v. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Nease v. Medical College HospitalsOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Cooperman v. University Surgical Associates, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Von Hoene v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1985

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Enyart v. O'NeillOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State ex rel. Sellers v. GerkenOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State ex rel. Heck v. KesslerOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. Feltner v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  5. Johns v. HortonOhio Court of Appeals · 2002

4 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