Eidson v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority, Unpublished Decision (4-22-2002)
Eidson v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority, Unpublished Decision (4-22-2002)
Opinion of the Court
Appellant's first assignment of error is overruled since controversies regarding the parole guidelines are not subject to declaratory action. R.C.
Appellant's second assignment of error is overruled since there is no evidence that the trial court relied on any evidence outside the complaint when it granted the 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss. See Civ.R. 12(B); Easy Tone Body Systems v. Kornylak Corp. (Apr. 13, 1992), Butler App. No. CA91-06-108, unreported.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Pursuant to App.R. 11.1(E), this entry shall not be relied upon as authority and will not be published in any form. A certified copy of this judgment entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27.
Costs to be taxed in compliance with App.R. 24.
Stephen W. Powell, Presiding Judge, William W. Young, Judge, Anthony Valen, Judge.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.