Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Fuqua v. Alexander

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1997No. 97-428PublishedCited by 144 opinions

1Per curiam

Fuqua asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his mandamus action. The court of appeals granted Alexander’s Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion when it dismissed Fuqua’s complaint. In order to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), it must appear beyond doubt that relator can prove no set of facts warranting relief, after all factual allegations of the complaint are presumed true and all reasonable inferences are made in relator’s favor. State ex rel. Seikbert v. Wilkinson (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 489, 490, 633 N.E.2d 1128, 1129.

T…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Seikbert v. WilkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State ex rel. Findlay Publishing Co. v. SchroederOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Fowler v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Boggs v. Springfield Local School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Bitter v. MissigOhio Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by144 opinions

  1. State ex rel. V Companies v. MarshallOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Morrow v. Reminger & Reminger Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
  3. State ex rel. The V Cos. v. MarshallOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. State ex rel. Russo v. DetersOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Ryant Committee v. Lorain County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1999

139 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