663 N.E.2d 533, 5411305Supreme Court of Ohio.
1996.
MERIT DOCKET Wednesday, May 15, 1996 96-480. Smith v. Record Custodian, Ohio Dept. of Pub. Safety, Bur. of Motor Vehicles. In Mandamus. On answer of respondent. Sua sponte, the cause is dismissed without prejudice for failure of relator to comply with the affidavit requirement of S.Ct.Prac.R. X(4)(B).
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-516. State v. Caslin. Franklin County, No. 94APA11-1589 Sua sponte, cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-701. State ex rel. Graves v. Callahan. In Mandamus and Procedendo. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
Page 1483
96-721. State ex rel. Guess v. Judges. In Mandamus. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-765. State ex rel. Graham v. Van Hoose. In Mandamus. On answer of respondent. Answer treated as motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-774. State ex rel. White v. Goldsberry. In Mandamus. On answer of respondent. Answer treated as motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-775. Allen v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. In Mandamus and Habeas Corpus. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-827. Martell v. Fed. Correctional Inst., Inc. In Habeas Corpus. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-972. Gill v. Hayes. In Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of prohibition. Upon consideration of relator’s motion for peremptory or alternative writ,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for peremptory or alternative writ be, and hereby is, denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., concur.
DOUGLAS, J., dissents and would grant an alternative writ.
RESNICK and STRATTON, JJ., not participating.
96-973. BPS Mgt., Inc. v. Elliot. In Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of prohibition. Upon consideration of respondents’ motion for alternative writ,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for alternative writ be, and hereby is, denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.
96-1061. State ex rel. Nozik v. Ford. In Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of prohibition. Upon consideration of relator’s motion for issuance of an alternative writ,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for issuance of an alternative writ be, and hereby is, denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur.