State ex rel. Henslee v. Newman
| Decision Date | 28 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-239,72-239 |
| Citation | 30 Ohio St.2d 324,285 N.E.2d 54 |
| Parties | , 59 O.O.2d 386 The STATE ex rel. HENSLEE, Appellant, v. NEWMAN, Ohio Department of Urban Affairs, Appellee. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Ralph Ross, in pro. per.
H. Michael Moser, Pros. Atty., for respondent.
This is an appeal from the denial of a writ of mandamus by the Court of Appeals for Franklin County.
Appellant, Laura J. Henslee, was a field coordinator with the Ohio Department of Urban Affairs until June 30, 1971, when the entire department was reorganized and all field offices abolished, thus eliminating her position.
Appellant seeks an order requiring the respondent, Bruce L. Newman, as Director of the Department of Urban Affairs, to reinstate her. The Court of Appeals had beford it considerable evidence, including depositions of witnesses, exhibits and affidavits. The opinion of the Court of Appeals reflects that appellant's reasons for seeking reinstatement were predicated upon factual claims, such as, (1) the job was not properly abolished; (2) inadequate notice, if it was in fact abolished; and (3) bad faith, if it was abolished.
Basically, appellant disagrees with the conclusions drawn by the Court of Appeals from the evidence. The opinion of the Court of Appeals, however, indicates a careful and thorough review of the evidence, and correctly states that the burden is on the appellant to 'demonstrate that there is plain, clear, and convincing evidence which would require the granting of the writ.' The material submitted by appellant to us likewise fails to demonstrate that the Court of Appeals improperly evaluated the evidence in light of the relief sought. The first paragraph of the syllabus in State ex rel. Skinner Engine Co. v. Kouri (1940), 136 Ohio St. 343, 25 N.E.2d 940, is as follows, 'Mandamus is an extraordinary writ and will not lie unless the claimant can establish a clear legal right thereto.'
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Doner v. Zody
...v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St.2d 141, 40 O.O.2d 141, 228 N.E.2d 631; and [Ohio St.3d 447] State ex rel. Henslee v. Newman (1972), 30 Ohio St.2d 324, 59 O.O.2d 386, 285 N.E.2d 54, approved and followed.) 4. Mandamus is the appropriate action to compel public authorities to institute app......
-
State ex rel. Slaby v. Summit County Council, s. 11059
... ... State ex rel ... Page 204 ... Henslee v. Newman (1972), 30 Ohio St.2d 324, 285 N.E.2d 54 [59 O.O.2d 386] ... Each relator prays that a writ issue, ordering the ... ...
-
State v. Athens Cnty. Comm'rs
...1235, ¶ 55; State ex rel. Pressley v. Indus. Comm., 11 Ohio St.2d 141, 161, 228 N.E.2d 631 (1967); State ex rel. Henslee v. Newman, 30 Ohio St.2d 324, 325, 59, 285 N.E.2d 54 (1972), Ohio Jurisprudence 2d (1959) 285, Section 37. {¶12} Under the first assignment of error, Jeffers contends the......
-
State ex rel. Altman-Bates v. Pub. Emps. Ret. Bd.
...’ " State ex rel. Doner v. Zody, 130 Ohio St.3d 446, 2011-Ohio-6117, 958 N.E.2d 1235, ¶ 55, quoting State ex rel. Henslee v. Newman, 30 Ohio St.2d 324, 325, 285 N.E.2d 54 (1972), quoting the court of appeals' opinion in that case. Clear and convincing evidence "is that measure or degree of ......