Bey v. Lucas Cty. Court of Common Pleas

2022 Ohio 2571
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided July 27, 2022·No. L-22-1119·Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

LUCAS COUNTY

Shariff Alameen Bey Court of Appeals No. L-22-1119 Relator v. Lucas County Court of Common Pleas DECISION AND JUDGMENT Respondent Decided: July 27, 2022

*****

Shariff Alameen Bey, Pro se.

*****

OSOWIK, J.

{¶ 1} On May, 18, 2022, relator, Shariff Alemeen Bey, filed a petition seeking a writ of quo warranto against respondent identified only as “Lucas County Court of Common Pleas.” Relator failed to name a specific individual subject to the requested writ in the caption of his petition and failed to provide a praecipe for service of the petition. As a result, no responsive pleadings have been filed. Nevertheless, for the reasons identified herein, we find that relator’s petition reveals that he clearly lacks standing to pursue the requested writ and we dismiss his petition.

{¶ 2} A quo warranto action is a proceeding that challenges an individual’s title to a public office. Beasley v. City of East Cleveland, 20 Ohio App.3d 370, 486 N.E.2d 859 (8th Dist.1984). R.C. 2733.05 establishes that the Ohio attorney general or a prosecuting attorney may bring an action in quo warranto for any reason identified in R.C. 2733.01. However, “a person other than the attorney general or a prosecuting attorney can bring a quo warrant action, as a private citizen, only when the person is personally claiming title to a public office.” State ex rel. Newell v. Jackson, 118 Ohio St.3d 138, 2008-Ohio-1965, 886 N.E.2d 846, ¶ 6. For a writ of quo warranto to issue on behalf of a private citizen they must “establish (1) that the office is being unlawfully held and exercised by respondent, and (2) that relator is entitled to the office.” Id. Therefore, as a private citizen, relator can only maintain an action in quo warranto if he personally claims that he is entitled to hold a public office occupied by a named respondent. Id.

{¶ 3} Relator’s petition is devoid of any such allegation. Instead, relator’s petition seeks an order from this court finding that he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas because he is a foreign national and, he alleges, only the “Consulate and the U.S. Supreme Court” may exercise personal jurisdiction over him. While the body of the petition alleges that either Judge Ian English, a current judge in the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, or Lucas County prosecutor Evy Jarret must defend the court’s exercise of jurisdiction over him, relator never asserts that he is entitled to hold either public office. Essentially, appellant seeks an order from this court excluding him from the jurisdiction of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas in perpetuity. Because his petition fails to allege he is entitled to hold a public office, relator clearly lacks standing to maintain his quo warranto action.

{¶ 4} “Sua sponte dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is appropriate if the complaint is frivolous or the claimant obviously cannot prevail on the facts alleged in the complaint.” State ex rel. Kreps v. Christiansen (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 313, 316, citing State ex rel. Bruggeman v. Ingraham (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 230, 231. Here, we sua sponte find that the relator’s clear lack of standing shows that he obviously cannot prevail on the requested writ of quo warranto.

{¶ 5} Therefore, it is hereby

{¶ 6} ORDERED that relator’s petition for writ of quo warranto is dismissed, and it is further

{¶ 7} ORDERED that all related costs of this action are charged to relator.

{¶ 8} IT IS SO ORDERED.

Shariff Alameen Bey

v. Lucas County Court

of Common Pleas

L-22-1119

Mark L. Pietrykowski, J. ____________________________ JUDGE

Thomas J. Osowik, J.

Myron C. Duhart, P.J. JUDGE CONCUR.

JUDGE

This decision is subject to further editing by the Supreme Court of Ohio’s Reporter of Decisions. Parties interested in viewing the final reported version are advised to visit the Ohio Supreme Court’s web site at:

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/ROD/docs/.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bey v. Lucas Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 2022 Ohio 2571 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).

2022 Ohio 2571 (Bey v. Lucas Cty. Court of Common Pleas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Beasley v. City of East Cleveland
486 N.E.2d 859 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1984)
State ex rel. Bruggeman v. Ingraham
718 N.E.2d 1285 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1999)
State ex rel. Kreps v. Christiansen
725 N.E.2d 663 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)
State ex rel. Newell v. City of Jackson
118 Ohio St. 3d 138 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2008)