MOOTISPAW v. ECKSTEIN

No. 96-777.

76 Ohio St.3d 383 (1996)

MOOTISPAW, APPELLANT, v. ECKSTEIN, PROS. ATTY., APPELLEE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided August 21, 1996.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rusty E. Mootispaw, pro se.

Steven Eckstein, Fayette County Prosecuting Attorney, and James B. Grandey, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.


Per Curiam.

In his sole proposition of law, Mootispaw asserts that the court of appeals erred in granting Eckstein's motion for summary judgment and denying the writ because prosecutors are required to investigate fraud and collusion in criminal convictions. In order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, Mootispaw had to establish (1) a clear legal right to the requested investigation, (2) a corresponding clear legal duty on the part of Eckstein to conduct...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases