Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Cartmell v. Dorrian

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1984No. 83-666PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Per curiam

R.C. 2731.01 states in pertinent part: “Mandamus is a writ, issued in the name of the state * * * commanding the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office * * In order for appellant to establish his right to a writ of mandamus he must show that the law specifically enjoins appellees to reinstate him and provide him with back pay. He must also show that he has no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. R.C. 2731.05.

In State, ex rel. Cartmell, v. Dorrian (1982), 70 Ohio St. 2d 128, 129-130 [24 O.O.3d 236], this court determined, as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Westchester Estates, Inc. v. BaconOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1933
  3. State ex rel. Cartmell v. DorrianOhio Supreme Court · 1982

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Bardo v. City of LyndhurstOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State ex rel. Weiss v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State Ex Rel. Connole v. Cleveland Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. State ex rel. Nichols v. Cuyahoga County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental DisabilitiesOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Kerns v. SimmersOhio Supreme Court · 2018

26 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