Opinion

State ex rel. Nichols v. Cuyahoga County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities

  • 72 Ohio St. 3d 205
  • 648 N.E.2d 823
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
May 17, 1995
Status
Published
Author
Cook
On the bench
Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
Cited by
30 cases

stating that "[w]here a plain and adequate remedy at law has been unsuccessfully invoked, a writ of mandamus will not lie to relitigate the same issue"

How later courts described this case

  • stating that "[w]here a plain and adequate remedy at law has been unsuccessfully invoked, a writ of mandamus will not lie to relitigate the same issue"

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Cook, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part. The filing of this second mandamus action and the appeal to this court is plainly frivolous conduct for which I would award attorney fees as a sanction.

Wright, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.

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.