Case ID: ohio-st-3d_62/html/1489-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Sweeney, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tuesday, December 31, 1991
    
    MOTION DOCKET
    91-2294.
    State, ex rel. Weiss, v. Indus. Comm.
   In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus. Upon consideration of respondents’ motion for protective order and/or for extension,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that said motion for protective order be, and the same is hereby, denied, effective December 30, 1991.

Sweeney, J.,

dissents and would grant the protective order pending the determination of respondents’ motion to dismiss. If the motion to dismiss is denied, the protective order should be lifted and respondents should be given an additional fourteen days to respond to relator’s discovery request.

Douglas and Wright, JJ., dissent.