Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Ohio Supreme Court, 1962

State ex rel. F. J. Heer Printing Co. v. Marshall

State ex rel. F. J. Heer Printing Co. v. Marshall
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided December 21, 1962 · Fourth, Griffith, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Place, Radcliff, Stead, Taet, Weygandt, Zimmerman
174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 119

State ex rel. F. J. Heer Printing Co. v. Marshall

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

This case has been submitted on the motion of The Columbus Blank Book Company for leave to intervene, and on the motion of the respondents to dismiss the case.

*120The motion for leave to intervene is sustained.

The relator being afforded an adequate remedyjn the ordinary course of the law, the motion to dismiss the case is sustained.

Case dismissed.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Radcliff, O’Neill and Griffith, JJ., concur. Radcliff, 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.

↑