Ohio Supreme Court, 1999

State ex rel. Leyendecker v. Duro Test Corp.

State ex rel. Leyendecker v. Duro Test Corp.
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided December 1, 1999 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
87 Ohio St. 3d 237; 719 N.E.2d 528

State ex rel. Leyendecker v. Duro Test Corp.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Mandamus will not issue where the relator has a plain and adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagle (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 28, 6 OBR 50, 451 N.E.2d 225. For this reason, the failure to pursue an adequate *238administrative remedy bars mandamus relief. State ex rel. Reeves v. Indus. Comm. (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 212, 559 N.E.2d 1311.

Under R.C. 4123.511(B)(1), claimant could have appealed the bureau’s order to a commission district hearing officer. The bureau’s order, moreover, informed claimant, in highlighted language, of his right and responsibility to appeal if he was dissatisfied with the wage as set. Claimant chose not to appeal.

The judgment of the court of appeals is hereby affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

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