Opinion

State ex rel. Woodbury v. Spitler

  • 34 Ohio St. 2d 134
  • 63 Ohio Op. 2d 229
  • 296 N.E.2d 526
  • 1973 Ohio LEXIS 360
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
May 23, 1973
Status
Published
Author
Herbebt
On the bench
Brown, Celebrezze, Corrigan, Herbebt, Herbert, Neill, Steen
Cited by
34 cases

“Extraordinary remedies * * * are available only when usual forms of procedure are incapable of affording relief”

How later courts described this case

  • “Extraordinary remedies * * * are available only when usual forms of procedure are incapable of affording relief”
  • “Extraordinary writs may not be employed before trial as a substitute for the remedy of appeal.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

HeRBebt, J.,

concurring. I concur, but believe that we could have reached the same result without citing E. C. 2731.10. That statute should not be construed as controlling the exercise of original jurisdiction in mandamus constitutionally granted to Courts of Appeals and this court.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.