Legal Opinion
State ex rel. Hunter v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 8, 2000No. 99-1590PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Per curiam
Hunter asserts that the court of appeals erred in denying the requested extraordinary relief in mandamus. For the following reasons, Hunter’s assertion lacks merit.
Initially, to the extent that Hunter requested a writ of mandamus to compel the common pleas court to rule on his motion to correct the record, Hunter now concedes that the common pleas court has ruled on his motion. A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel an act that has already been performed. State ex rel. Sharif v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 375, 376, 708 N.E.2d 718, 719.
Moreover, Hunter had…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. Zanders v. Ohio Parole BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. White v. GoldsberryOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- State ex rel. Hester v. CrushOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- State ex rel. Hill v. NiehausOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Jones v. Montgomery County Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- State ex rel. Hunter v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common PleasOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Clarke v. McFaul, 89447 (5-18-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- James v. Callahan, 89654 (5-8-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- Jarrett v. Cuyahoga Cty. Common Pleas Court, Unpublished Decision (5-2-2006)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2006
- State v. D'ApolitoOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.