Case Name: The State, ex rel. Podley, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1934-02-14
Citations: 127 Ohio St. 583
Docket Number: No. 24439
Parties: The State, ex rel. Podley, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio.
Judges: Weygandt, O. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Beyes and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, New Service
Volume: 127
Pages: 583–584

Head Matter:
The State, ex rel. Podley, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio.
(No. 24439
Decided February 14, 1934.)
Mr. I. H. Ruth, for relator.
Mr. John W. Bricker, attorney general, and Mr. B. B. Zurmehly, for respondent.
Reporter’s Note: For final disposition of this case, see 128 Ohio St., 272.’

Opinion:
This cause came on to be heard upon the petition of the relator and demurrer of respondent, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged that said demurrer be, and the same hereby is, sustained for the reason that the writ of mandamus is an extraordinary writ which is not available where there is a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law (State, ex rel. Bassichis, v. Zangerle, County Aud., 126 Ohio St., 118), and that Section 1465-90, General Code, which is now in force and provides for a rehearing, does not apply to appeal from a proceeding which was pending when that statute was amended, such appeal being governed by the statute in effect at the time the relator's original claim was filed, which afforded relator an adequate remedy at law by filing an appeal in the common pleas court within thirty days after a rehearing was refused. (Industrial Commission v. Vail, 110 Ohio St., 304.)
Leave is hereby given to the relator to plead further within thirty days, and if not filed within that time it is ordered and adjudged that the writ of mandamus prayed for be, and the same hereby is, denied.
Decree accordingly.
Weygandt, O. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Beyes and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.