Opinion · Ohlaw Ohio

STATE EX REL. MAY v. CISSELL, 73 Ohio St.3d 46 (1995)

STATE EX REL. MAY, APPELLANT, v. CISSELL, CLERK, ET AL., APPELLEES., 652 N.E.2d 201 (Ohio 1995)

Type: Opinion
Court: Ohlaw Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohlaw
Date: 1995-08-09
Topic: general

STATE EX REL. MAY v. CISSELL, 73 Ohio St.3d 46 (1995) 652 N.E.2d 201 THE STATE EX REL. MAY, APPELLANT, v. CISSELL, CLERK, ET AL., APPELLEES.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed STATE EX REL. MAY v. CISSELL, 73 Ohio St.3d 46 (1995). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

STATE EX REL. MAY v. CISSELL,73 Ohio St.3d 46(1995)

652 N.E.2d 201

THE STATE EX REL. MAY, APPELLANT, v. CISSELL, CLERK, ET AL., APPELLEES.

Nos. 95-546 and 95-547

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Submitted June 21, 1995 —

Decided August 9, 1995.

APPEALS from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Nos. C-940988 and C-941043.

Morris May, pro se.Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, andChristian J. Schaefer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellees.Page 47

The judgments of the court of appeals dismissing the complaints for writs of mandamus are affirmed on the basis that appellant possesses an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to correct the trial court records via App.R. 9(E). SeeState exrel. Howard v. Ferreri(1994),70 Ohio St.3d 587,592,639 N.E.2d 1189,1194-1195, and cases cited therein.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., concur.Page 48