Benson v. Callahan
This text of 2014 Ohio 3243 (Benson v. Callahan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as Benson v. Callahan, 2014-Ohio-3243.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 101435
JAMES BENSON #494-913 RELATOR
vs.
JUDGE KENNETH CALLAHAN RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED
Writ of Mandamus and/or Procedendo Motion No. 476060 Order No. 476466
RELEASE DATE: July 13, 2014 RELATOR
James Benson, pro se #494-913, M.C.I. P.O. Box 57 Marion, Ohio 43301
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor The Justice Center - 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J.:
{¶1} James Benson has filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus and/or
procedendo. Benson seeks an order from this court that requires Judge Kenneth
Callahan to render a ruling with regard to a motion to vacate and set aside sentence that
was filed in State v. Benson, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-05-465675-A.
{¶2} Attached to Judge Callahan’s motion for summary judgment is a copy of a
judgment entry, journalized on June 23, 2014, which demonstrates that a ruling has been
rendered with regard to Benson’s motion to vacate and set aside sentence. Thus, the
complaint for a writ of mandamus and/or procedendo is moot. State ex rel. Jerninghan v.
Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 1996-Ohio-117, 658 N.E.2d
723; State ex rel. Gantt v. Coleman, 6 Ohio St.3d 5, 450 N.E.2d 1163 (1983).
{¶3} It must also be noted that Benson’s complaint did not contain a sworn
affidavit that specified the details of his claim required by Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a), or an
affidavit that specified each civil action or appeal of a civil action filed within the last five
years as required by R.C. 2969.25(A). The failure to comply with the requirements of
Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) and R.C. 2969.25(A) warrants dismissal of Benson’s complaint
for a writ of mandamus and/or procedendo. See State ex rel. Washington v. Ohio Adult
Parole Auth., 87 Ohio St.3d 258, 1999-Ohio-53, 719 N.E.2d 544; State ex rel. Jones v.
McGinty, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92602, 2009-Ohio-1258; State ex rel. Hightower v.
Russo, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 82321, 2003-Ohio-3679.
{¶4} Accordingly, we grant Judge Callahan’s motion for summary judgment. Costs to Judge Callahan. Costs waived. The court directs the clerk of court to serve all
parties with notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal as required by
Civ.R. 58(B).
{¶5} Writ denied.
MARY EILEEN KILBANE, JUDGE
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, P.J., and PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J., CONCUR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2014 Ohio 3243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benson-v-callahan-ohioctapp-2014.