Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Midwest Pride IV, Inc. v. Pontious

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1996No. 95-1297PublishedCited by 331 opinions

1Per curiam

For a writ of mandamus to issue, the relator must possess a clear legal right to the respondent’s performance of a clear legal duty and have no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. State ex rel. Scripps Howard Broadcasting Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 19, 20, 652 N.E.2d 179, 181. The court of appeals dismissed this cause on the grounds that M.P. could not establish its clear legal right to a hearing on the motion to set aside the sheriffs sale or Judge Pontious’s clear legal duty to conduct such a hearing. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

In…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Peterson v. TeodosioOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Joyce v. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State ex rel. Keenan v. CalabreseOhio Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by331 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Crabtree v. Franklin County Board of HealthOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Kincaid v. Erie InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Rayess v. Educational Commission for Foreign Medical GraduatesOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Whaley v. Franklin County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Fontbank, Inc. v. Compuserve, IncorporatedOhio Court of Appeals · 2000

326 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