Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Ohio Supreme Court, 1961

State ex rel. Coury v. Ohio Bell Telephone Co.

State ex rel. Coury v. Ohio Bell Telephone Co.
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided June 7, 1961 · Bell, Fourth, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Place, Radoliee, Stead, Taet, Wetgandt, Zimmerman
172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 309

State ex rel. Coury v. Ohio Bell Telephone Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The relatrix is afforded an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law under Section 4905.26, Revised Code, by filing a complaint with the Public Utilities Commission and an appeal from an adverse order of the commission.

A writ of mandamus may be denied where there is a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. See Section 2731.05, Revised Code.

Writ denied.

Wetgandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Bell, Radoliee and O’Neill, JJ., concur. Radoliee, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of Herbert, J.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑