Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Leach v. Schotten

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 30, 1995No. 94-1594PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

In order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, Leach had to establish that he possesses a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, that Schotten is under a clear legal duty to perform the requested act, and that Leach has no plain and adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Carter v. Wilkinson (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 65, 637 N.E.2d 1.

Leach contends in his first proposition of law that a regulation of a state correctional facility which has the effect of completely prohibiting inmates from getting married while incarcerated is not reasonably related to legitimate penological interests and is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Turner v. SafleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. State ex rel. Carter v. SchottenOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State ex rel. Carter v. WilkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Snider v. StapletonOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Buehl v. LehmanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1992

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Strothers v. TurnerOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State ex rel. Mackey v. BlackwellOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  3. State ex rel. Strothers v. TurnerOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State Ex Rel. Chavis v. Griffin, Unpublished Decision (6-15-2000)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API