State ex rel. Manson v. Morris
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
For the following reasons we grant respondents’ motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, Manson’s request for a writ of mandamus is denied.
Manson argues that CCI’s visiting office and the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction denied him Addy’s visitation because she was a former employee of the department and that the denial was unconstitutional.
Three requirements must be met to establish a right to a writ of mandamus: that relator have a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, that respondent have a clear legal duty to perform the acts, and that relator have no plain and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Kentucky Department of Corrections v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Bellamy v. BradleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
- State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagleOhio Supreme Court · 1983
3Cited by30 opinions
- Mootispaw v. EcksteinOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State ex rel. Rankin v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 2003
- Mootispaw v. EcksteinOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State ex rel. Village of Botkins v. LawsOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. McMaster v. School Employees Retirement SystemOhio Supreme Court · 1994
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.