Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wagner v. Messner, Aud.green2 sentences1984See Wagner v. Messner (1940), 136 Ohio St. 514 [ 17 O.O. 155 ]. 1984See Wagner v. Messner (1940), 136 Ohio St. 514 [ 17 O.O. 155 ]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Summers v. Lancia Nursing Homes, Inc.
green
1 sentence2023No. 22 BE 7, citing Summers II, 2016-Ohio-7935 at ¶ 27-28 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Earls, Unpublished Decision (8-4-2006)
neutral
1 sentence2017No. C-040531, 2006-Ohio-4029 , 2006 WL 2237793 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Magnum Steel & Trading, L.L.C. v. Mink
green
1 sentence2015Summit Nos. 26127 & 26231, 2013-Ohio-2431, ¶ 44 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Boylen v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections
green
2 sentences2011And Corr. (2009), 182 Ohio App.3d 265 , 912 N.E.2d 624 , Ohio Adm.Code 5120-9-31 sets forth the administrative process that must be followed by an inmate in order to appeal the collection of costs. {¶7} Because the Ohio Administrative Code provides an avenue to challenge the improper collection of funds from an inmate account, we find this constitutes an adequate remedy at law which bars the issuance of a writ of mandamus. 2011And Corr. (2009), 182 Ohio App.3d 265 , 912 N.E.2d 624 , Ohio Adm.Code 5120-9-31 sets forth the administrative process that must be followed by an inmate in order to appeal the collection of costs. {¶7} Because the Ohio Administrative Code provides an avenue to challenge the improper collection of funds from an inmate account, we find this constitutes an adequate remedy at law which bars the issuance of a writ of mandamus. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Pegan v. Crawmer
green
2 sentences2008Petitioner was released from prison on March 25, 2008, and was, in fact, placed on post-release control. {¶ 4} "A writ of habeas corpus is warranted in certain extraordinary circumstances where there is an unlawful restraint of a person's liberty and there is no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law." Johnson v. Timmeman-Cooper (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 614 , 616 , 757 N.E.2d 1153 , quoting, Pegan v. Crawmer (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 97 , 99 , 666 N.E.2d 1091 . *Page 3 {¶ 5} The Seventh Appellate District addressed the issue of whether post-release control qualifies as confinement thereby maki 2008Petitioner was released from prison on March 25, 2008, and was, in fact, placed on post-release control. {¶ 4} "A writ of habeas corpus is warranted in certain extraordinary circumstances where there is an unlawful restraint of a person's liberty and there is no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law." Johnson v. Timmeman-Cooper (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 614 , 616 , 757 N.E.2d 1153 , quoting, Pegan v. Crawmer (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 97 , 99 , 666 N.E.2d 1091 . *Page 3 {¶ 5} The Seventh Appellate District addressed the issue of whether post-release control qualifies as confinement thereby maki | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper
green
2 sentences2008Petitioner was released from prison on March 25, 2008, and was, in fact, placed on post-release control. {¶ 4} "A writ of habeas corpus is warranted in certain extraordinary circumstances where there is an unlawful restraint of a person's liberty and there is no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law." Johnson v. Timmeman-Cooper (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 614 , 616 , 757 N.E.2d 1153 , quoting, Pegan v. Crawmer (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 97 , 99 , 666 N.E.2d 1091 . *Page 3 {¶ 5} The Seventh Appellate District addressed the issue of whether post-release control qualifies as confinement thereby maki 2008Petitioner was released from prison on March 25, 2008, and was, in fact, placed on post-release control. {¶ 4} "A writ of habeas corpus is warranted in certain extraordinary circumstances where there is an unlawful restraint of a person's liberty and there is no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law." Johnson v. Timmeman-Cooper (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 614 , 616 , 757 N.E.2d 1153 , quoting, Pegan v. Crawmer (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 97 , 99 , 666 N.E.2d 1091 . *Page 3 {¶ 5} The Seventh Appellate District addressed the issue of whether post-release control qualifies as confinement thereby maki | 1 | 2008–2008 |
United States v. Ralph Max Howard
green
1 sentence2005Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Larkins v. G.D. Searle & Co.
green
2 sentences2002Searle & Co. (1991), 68 Ohio App.3d 746 , 589 N.E.2d 488 . {¶ 18} Clearly, the typical avenue to challenge a final assessment is the administrative appeal process set forth in the Revised Code. 2002Searle & Co. (1991), 68 Ohio App.3d 746 , 589 N.E.2d 488 . {¶ 18} Clearly, the typical avenue to challenge a final assessment is the administrative appeal process set forth in the Revised Code. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
State, Ex Rel. Corder v. Wilson
green
1 sentence2002Corder v. Wilson (1991), 68 Ohio App.3d 567 , for the proposition that a motion in the trial court to correct a calculation of jail time credit is a proper avenue to challenge an incorrect calculation. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.