Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Van de Kerkhoff v. Dowling

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 26, 1991No. 90-746PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

For a writ of mandamus to issue, relators must first show that they are entitled to respondents’ performance of a clear legal duty. State, ex rel. The Fairfield Leader, v. Ricketts (1990), 56 Ohio St.3d 97, 102, 564 N.E.2d 486, 491. To establish a duty for respondents to accept and determine the sufficiency of their part-petitions, as supplemented, relators rely on the Lakewood Charter, principles of estoppel and the doctrine of substantial compliance. We find relators’ reliance misplaced and, therefore, deny the writ.

*57 The Charter

Relators argue that they are entitled to supplement their…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Fairfield Leader v. RickettsOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State ex rel. Senn v. Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  3. State ex rel. Chevalier v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  4. State ex rel. Evergreen Co. v. Board of Elections of Franklin CountyOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  5. State ex rel. Janasik v. SarosyOhio Supreme Court · 1967

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Ditmars v. McSweeneyOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State ex rel. Yiamouyiannis v. TaftOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State ex rel. Shaw v. LynchOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. State ex rel. Ditmars v. McSweeneyOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API