State ex rel. Kay v. Fuerst

Ohio Supreme Court
State ex rel. Kay v. Fuerst, 156 Ohio St. (N.S.) 188 (Ohio 1951)
Hart, Matthias, Middleton, Stewart, Taft, Weygandt, Zimmerman

State ex rel. Kay v. Fuerst

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel the observance of law generally, but will be *189confined to commanding the performance of specific acts specially enjoined by law to be performed. Cullen, Vice Mayor, v. State, ex rel. City of Toledo, 105 Ohio St., 545, 138 N. E., 58; State, ex rel. Stanley, v. Cook, Supt. of Banks, 146 Ohio St., 348, 66 N. E. (2d), 207; State, ex rel. Foster, v. Miller et al., Tax Comm., 136 Ohio St., 295, 25 N. E. (2d), 686.

Judgment affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Middleton, Taft, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.

Reference

Full Case Name
The State, ex rel. Kay v. Fuerst, Clerk of Court
Status
Published