State ex rel. Willis v. Sheboy
Ohio
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2024State ex rel. Kushlak v. Cleveland Animal Protective League Ohio Ct. App.
- 2022State ex rel. Ames v. Portage Cty. Bd. of Commrs. Ohio Ct. App.
- 2018State ex rel. Kerns v. Simmers Ohio
- 2018State ex rel. Washington v. Krichbaum Ohio Ct. App.
- 2017State ex rel. Samarghandi v. Ferenc Ohio
- 2016State ex rel. Kirin v. Krichbaum Ohio Ct. App.
- 2016State ex rel. Byers v. Carr Ohio Ct. App.
- 2014State ex rel. Brown v. Ashtabula County Board of Elections Ohio
- 2013State ex rel. Shumaker v. Nichols Ohio
- 2012State ex rel. GMS Mgt., Co., Inc. v. Lazzaro Ohio Ct. App.
Cites 3 cases
- State ex rel. Kronenberger-Fodor Building Co. v. City of Parma
- State ex rel. Cinnamon Lake Utility Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
- State ex rel. Federal Homes Properties, Inc. v. Singer
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
The State, ex rel. Willis, Appellant, v. Sheboy et al., Appellees.
Judges
- Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Weber, Holmes and C. Brown, JJ., concur.
- Weber, J., of the Second Appellate District, sitting for Locher, J.
- Miller, J., of the Third Appellate District, sitting for J. P. Celebrezze, J.
Attorneys
- Mr. Winston E. Willis, pro se.
- Mr. James E. Young, director of law, and Mr. Theodore J. Esbom, for respondents.
R.C. 2731.05 provides that “[t]he writ of mandamus must not be issued when there is plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.”
Section 76-6(d) of the Charter of the city of Cleveland vests jurisdiction in the Board of Building Standards and Building Appeals to hear and decide appeals from decisions of the Commissioner of Building and Housing, and Section 3103.18(e) of the Ordinances of the city of Cleveland provides the procedure for such appeals.
In State, ex rel. Kronenberger-Fodor Co., v. Parma (1973), 34 Ohio St. 2d 222 [63 O.O.2d 362], a case involving zoning regulations, the syllabus provides that “* * * where a constitutional process of appeal has been legislatively provided, the sole fact that pursuing such process would encompass more delay and inconvenience than seeking a writ of mandamus is insufficient to prevent the process from constituting a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.” See, also, State, ex rel. Cinnamon Lake Utility, v. Pub. Util Comm. (1975), 41 Ohio St. 2d 79, 80 [70 O.O.2d 165.]
Although relator-appellant asserted in his complaint filed in the court of appeals that there was currently pending in the Cleveland Municipal Court a complaint for injunction to close down the businesses operated on the premises for failure to secure permits and that he had no adequate remedy at law, and further asserts in argument in his brief filed herein, that no final order has been issued in the matter from which an appeal can be taken, he does assert in his complaint that the permits were in fact denied. We conclude that relator had a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law by way of appeal from the denial of permits previously sought.
Relator also sought a writ of mandamus for the issuance of further legally applied for permits in the future.
“* * * The function of mandamus is to compel the performance of a present existing duty as to which there is a default. It is not granted to take effect prospectively, and it contemplates the performance of an act which is incumbent on the respondent when the application for a writ is made. * * *” State, ex rel. Federal Homes Properties, Inc., v. Singer (1967), 9 Ohio St. 2d 95, 96 [38 O.O.2d 227].
Thus, mandamus will not lie to compel the issuance of permits to be applied for in the future.
The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed
Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Weber, Holmes and C. Brown, JJ., concur.
Weber, J., of the Second Appellate District, sitting for Locher, J.
Miller, J., of the Third Appellate District, sitting for J. P. Celebrezze, J.