Ohio Supreme Court, 1992

State ex rel. Tillimon v. Weiher

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided December 11, 1992 · Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright

65 Ohio St. 3d 468; 605 N.E.2d 35

Cases that cite this one

24 later published cases cite this decision.

Garg v. Scott (Ohio Ct. App. 2024)
State v. Weger (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)
State ex rel. Collins v. Kilbane (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)
State ex rel. Shaker Hts. Apartments Owner, L.L.C. v. Scott (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)
State ex rel. Carlson v. State Bd. of Pharmacy (Ohio Ct. App. 2018)
Thompson v. State (Ohio Ct. App. 2013)
State Ex Rel. Foster v. Buchanan, Unpublished Decision (4-26-2006) (Ohio Ct. App. 2006)
Shabazz v. Municipal Court, Unpublished Decision (10-7-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
State v. Robb (Ohio 2000)
State v. Robb (Ohio 2000)
State v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (11-18-1999) (Ohio Ct. App. 1999)
State Ex Rel. Bray v. Russell, Unpublished Decision (11-9-1998) (Ohio Ct. App. 1998)
State ex rel. Luna v. Huffman (Ohio 1996)
State ex rel. Sherrills v. Court of Common Pleas (Ohio 1995)
State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula (Ohio 1995)
State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula (Ohio 1995)
State ex rel. Sherrills v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (Ohio 1995)
State ex rel. Kuczak v. Saffold (Ohio 1993)
In re Certain Seized Property of Mark Beezup (Vermont Superior Court 2011)
Nichols v. Staybridge Suites, 08ap-773 (3-26-2009) (Ohio Ct. App. 2009)
State Ex Rel. United Auto Aero. v. Oh W.C., Unpublished Decision (2-3-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
State v. Ohio Housing Finance Agency, Unpublished Decision (12-9-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
State v. Doneghy, Unpublished Decision (8-14-2000) (Ohio Ct. App. 2000)
State Ex Rel. Nelson v. Russo, Unpublished Decision (10-21-1999) (Ohio Ct. App. 1999)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

According to O’Brien v. University Community Tenants Union, Inc. (1975), 42 Ohio St.2d 242, 71 O.O.2d 223, 327 N.E.2d 753, syllabus:

“In order for a court to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted * * *, it must appear beyond doubt from the complaint that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling him to recovery. (Conley v. Gibson [1957], 355 U.S. 41 [78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80], followed).”

We hold that Tillimon can prove no set of facts entitling him to relief and affirm the dismissal of the complaint.

First, Tillimon demands that we order Weiher and his successors to promptly decide all cases in Toledo Municipal Court, including the underlying case. We presume the regularity of trial court proceedings. Middleburg Hts. v. Brown (1986), 24 Ohio St.3d 66, 68, 24 OBR 215, 217, 493 N.E.2d 547, 549. *470Further, we will not issue a writ of mandamus to compel the observance of laws generally. State ex rel. Stanley v. Cook (1946), 146 Ohio St. 348, 32 O.O. 419, 66 N.E.2d 207, paragraph seven of the syllabus; State ex rel. Shafer v. Ohio Turnpike Comm. (1953), 159 Ohio St. 581, 589, 50 O.O. 465, 469, 113 N.E.2d 14, 19. Accordingly, we do not, in a general manner, order a court to render its decisions promptly in a mandamus action.

Second, Tillimon demands that we direct Weiher to decide the case in his favor. However, mandamus “ * * * cannot control judicial discretion.” R.C. 2731.03; State ex rel. De Ville Photography, Inc. v. McCarroll (1958), 167 Ohio St. 210, 4 O.O.2d 268, 147 N.E.2d 254. Consequently, we do not direct a judge to exercise his discretion in a certain manner via mandamus.

Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the complaint.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur. Resnick, J., not participating.

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