676 N.E.2d 901-902Supreme Court of Ohio.
1997.
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSIALS Monday, March 17, 199797-32. State ex rel. Gantz v. McGraw-Edison Co.
Franklin App. No. 96APD01-87. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. It appears from the records of this court that appellant has not filed a merit brief, due March 10, 1997, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed sua sponte,
97-374. State ex rel. Timson v. Petro.
In Mandamus, Prohibition and Procedendo. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for writs of mandamus, prohibition, and procedendo. Upon consideration of relator’s application for dismissal of the first, second, third, fifth, sixth, and seventh causes of action,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal of the first, second, third, fifth, sixth, and seventh causes of action be, and hereby is, granted.
The fourth cause of action remains pending.
97-498. State ex rel. Kmart Corp. v. Eighth Dist. Court ofAppeals.
In Prohibition. This cause originated in this court upon the filing of a complaint for a writ of prohibition. Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.