With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". factors were considered in our analysis: the prosecutor abused his discretion in failing to make the application; relators relied on the BOE’s and the prosecutor’s office’s representations that the county would pay their legal fees; the prosecutor’s office allegedly led the commissioners to believe that they could not make the application unilaterally and that relators were not entitled to appointed counsel; and the BOE publicly supported relators, essentially stating that they acted in good faith and a well-intended manner when performing their official job duties. {¶ 36} Additionally, we find that relators have established that they have no adequate remedy at law, thus entitling them to relief in mandamus. See Seminatore, 66 Ohio St.2d at 463-464, 20 O.O.3d 388, 423 N.E.2d 105 (<HOLDING>). Ill {¶ 37} Having determined that relators

A: holding that mandamus was appropriate remedy because temporary order granting visitation is not appealable
B: holding that mandamus is an appropriate remedy because the trial courts issuance of temporary orders is not subject to interlocutory appeal
C: holding that when the prosecuting attorney    refuses to afford counsel to a county board in defense of an action    mandamus would be an appropriate remedy
D: holding that defendants response i cant  i cant afford it when informed that an attorney would be provided for him if he could not afford one did not without further explanation amount to a clear unambiguous or unequivocal invocation of the right to counsel
C.