Opinion
No. 35828
Decided February 25, 1959.
Mandamus — Not available where adequate remedy by injunction — Shareholder's right to inspect books of corporation — Enforceable by injunction.
IN MANDAMUS.
Relator has invoked the original jurisdiction of this court to obtain a writ of mandamus against the respondent bank and its officers. In his amended petition he alleges that he is a shareholder of the bank; that four times he has orally demanded a copy of the report of the federal bank examiner covering the years 1952, 1953 and 1954, but the same has been refused by respondents; that he has demanded certain other records of the bank in order to determine whether its business is being conducted in a businesslike, honest and proper manner for the protection of the public who transact business with the bank; that the bank, by order of its directors, has refused to furnish him with any of its records; and that he has no plain, adequate and complete remedy at law.
The prayer is for a writ requiring respondents to permit relator to examine any of the books and records of the bank at any reasonable hour and to deliver to relator for his inspection a report of the federal bank examiner for the years 1952 to 1954, inclusive.
Respondents demurred to the amended petition for the reason that it appears on its face that relator is not entitled to the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.
The cause has been submitted on the amended petition and the demurrer thereto.
Mr. J. Earl Pratt, for relator.
Mr. J.B. Collier, for respondents.
Mandamus is not available where there is a plain and adequate remedy, either legal or equitable, in the ordinary course of the law. State, ex rel. Stanley, v. Cook, Supt. of Banks, 146 Ohio St. 348, 66 N.E.2d 207; States ex rel. Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass Co. v. Industrial Commission, 162 Ohio St. 302, 123 N.E.2d 23.
The relief sought by relator is an act which may be compelled by injunction, the proper form of remedy to enforce the right of a shareholder in a private corporation to inspect its books and records. Cincinnati Volksblatt Co. v. Hoffmeister, 62 Ohio St. 189, 56 N.E. 1033, 78 Am. St., Rep., 707, 48 L.R.A., 732.
The demurrer to the amended petition is sustained and a writ of mandamus is denied.
Demurrer sustained and writ denied.
WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, TAFT, MATTHIAS, BELL and HERBERT, JJ., concur.