Case Name: STATE, ex rel. VILLAGE OF KETTERING, OHIO, etc., Relator, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, etc., Respondents
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1955-05-23
Citations: 71 Ohio Law Abs. 550
Docket Number: No. 2343
Parties: STATE, ex rel. VILLAGE OF KETTERING, OHIO, etc., Relator, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, etc., Respondents.
Judges: MILLER, PJ, HORNBECK and WISEMAN, JJ, concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 71
Pages: 550–551

Head Matter:
STATE, ex rel. VILLAGE OF KETTERING, OHIO, etc., Relator, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, etc., Respondents.
Ohio Appeals, Second District, Montgomery County.
No. 2343.
Decided May 23, 1955.
Beigel & Mahrt, by Jack E. Staley, Dayton, for the Village of Kettering, Ohio, Relator.
Mathias Heck, Pros. Atty., By John P. McHugh, Asst. Pros. Atty., Dayton, for the Montgomery County Board of Elections, etc., Respondents.
Coolidge, Becker, Wall & Wood, by Edgar J. Graef, Jr., of Counsel, Dayton, Amicus Curiae.

Opinion:
OPINION
By THE COURT:
This matter is presented on demurrer to the petition in an original action for a writ of prohibition. The extraordinary writ of prohibition is never granted except upon a showing of a clear right. Where there is a doubt in the mind of the Court the writ is denied. The allegations in the petition do not show that there is a clear right to the writ; but rather it presents a doubtful case.
The demurrer to the petition is sustained.
MILLER, PJ, HORNBECK and WISEMAN, JJ, concur.