Legal Opinion

State, Ex Rel. v. Conserv. Dist.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 10, 1940No. Nos. 27985 and 27986PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Relators contend that under Section 6, Article IV of the Ohio Constitution, giving Courts of Appeals original jurisdiction in mandamus, and under Sections 6828-70 and 12284, General Code, the Court of Appeals of Guernsey county was authorized to entertain these actions and to issue the writs.

Section 6828-70, General Code, is a special statutory grant of power to conservancy districts to enforce certain of their orders by the extraordinary writ of mandamus (State, ex rel.Miami Conservancy Dist., v. Baden, 130 Ohio St. 251,198 N.E. 865), and Section 12284, General Code, simply authorizes the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Wahl v. SpeerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1920
  2. Abiaca Drainage Dist. v. Albert Theis & Sons, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1939
  3. State Ex Rel. Commercial Investors Corp. v. ZangerleOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  4. State Ex Rel. Miami Conservancy District v. BadenOhio Supreme Court · 1935

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. First National Bank v. Village of BotkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Millington v. Morrow County Bd. of Commiss., 2008ca0011 (5-14-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
  4. State Ex Rel. Horvath v. RiderOhio Supreme Court · 1950
  5. State Ex Rel. Palmer v. State Board of Barber ExaminersOhio Supreme Court · 1945

1 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