[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 

.]




THE STATE EX REL. LONG v. COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF CARDINGTON ET AL.
  [Cite as State ex rel. Long v. Cardington Village Council, 

.]
Mandamus—Application for attorney fees and costs—Relator awarded attorney
          fees and a refund in costs—Relator’s request for additional attorney fees
          denied.
   (No. 00-857—Submitted October 30, 2001—Decided December 12, 2001.)
                                      IN MANDAMUS.
                      ON APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEY FEES and COSTS.
                                  __________________
          {¶ 1} On relator’s application for attorney fees and costs and relator’s
submission of evidence in support of application, relator is awarded $17,623.75 in
attorney fees and a refund of $140 in costs (security deposit and docket fees).
Relator’s request for additional attorney fees is denied.
          MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ.,
concur.
          LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissents.
                                  __________________
          LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissenting.
          {¶ 2} I did not agree with the majority’s decision to grant a writ of
mandamus because I believed that the relator had an adequate remedy in the
ordinary course of the law under R.C. 121.22(I)(1). See State ex rel. Long v.
Cardington Village Council (2001), 

, 

, 65-
67 (Lundberg Stratton, J., dissenting). Consequently, I do not agree that she is
entitled to recover her costs and attorney fees. Therefore, I must respectfully
dissent.
                                  __________________
                                SUPREME COURT OF OHIO




       Alden, Taylor & Durkin, L.L.C., Randolph W. Alden, Kevin Durkin and
James R. Taylor, for relator.
       Manos, Martin, Pergram & Dietz, L.P.A., Dennis L. Pergram and James M.
Dietz, for respondents.
                                 __________________




                                          2