Clarke v. Gallagher, 91805 (9-22-2008)

2008 Ohio 4869
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 22, 2008
DocketNo. 91805.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2008 Ohio 4869 (Clarke v. Gallagher, 91805 (9-22-2008)) 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.

Bluebook
Clarke v. Gallagher, 91805 (9-22-2008), 2008 Ohio 4869 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
{¶ 1} Relator, Oniel Clarke, requests that this court compel respondent judge to rule on unspecified motions which he avers are pending in State v. Clarke, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-466666.

{¶ 2} Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss. Relator has not opposed the motion. We find the motion to dismiss to be well-taken and dismiss this action.

{¶ 3} In the complaint, "*** the Relator implores this honorable court to direct respondent to rule on all motions set before the said court and to dismiss all charges ***." Complaint, ad damnum clause, at 1-2. Clarke does not, however provide any information on which motions are in controversy. In Sultaana v. Giant Eagle, Cuyahoga App. No. 90130,2007-Ohio-3769, the relator requested that this court compel the judge in the underlying case to act on motions and requests which were filed with the respondent court. "*** [The relator] does not state what the motions and requests were and when they were made. Without such critical information, this court cannot determine the merits of a mandamus claim." Id. at ¶ 3. The relator's failure to plead specific facts resulted in dismissal of the complaint in mandamus. Id. at ¶ 4, et seq. See also State ex rel. Henderson v. McCormick (Nov. 4, 1999), Cuyahoga App. No. 77008; State ex rel. Aliane v. Sheward, Franklin App. No. 02AP-949, 2003-Ohio-6554.

{¶ 4} Likewise, Clarke's request that this court compel respondent to dismiss the underlying case is not appropriate for mandamus. "`Mandamus will not lie to *Page 2 control the judgment or discretion of a court in rendering a decision(State, ex re. Sherwood, v. Hoffman, Judge, 95 Ohio St. 144, 117 N.E. 10)." State, ex rel. White, v. Jewell (1937), 132 Ohio St. 300, 302. See also R.C. 2731.03 ***." State ex rel. Baker v. Lawther (Jan. 26, 1989), Cuyahoga App. No. 84850, at 2-3. See also State ex rel. Brady v.Russo, Cuyahoga App. No. 90419, 2007-Ohio-5333, at ¶ 8. Because Clarke is requesting that this court issue a writ of mandamus to control judicial discretion and to require a specific outcome in a judicial proceeding, the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

{¶ 5} Additionally, "***we find that [relator's] complaint for a writ of mandamus is defective since it is improperly captioned. A complaint for a writ of mandamus must be brought in the name of the state, on relation of the person applying. The failure of relator to properly caption his complaint for a writ of mandamus warrants dismissal. R.C. 2731.04; Blankenship v. Blackwell, 103 Ohio St.3d 567, 2004 Ohio 5596,817 N.E.2d 382; Gannon v. Gallagher (1945) 145 Ohio St. 170,60 N.E.2d 666; Dunning v. Cleary (Jan. 11, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 78763."State v. McMonagle, Cuyahoga App. No. 91477, 2008-Ohio-3798, at ¶ 2. *Page 3

{¶ 6} Similarly, relator has failed to comply with Loc. App. R. 45(B)(1)(a) which requires that complaints in original actions be supported by an affidavit from the plaintiff or relator specifying the details of the claim. State ex rel. Hightower v. Russo, Cuyahoga App. No. 82321, 2003-Ohio-3679. Relator "also failed to include the address of the parties in the caption of the complaint as required by Civil Rule 10 (A). This may also be grounds for dismissing the action. State exrel. Sherrills v. State (2001), 91 Ohio St. 3d 133, 742 N.E.2d 651."State ex rel. Hall v. Calabrese (Aug. 16, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 79810, at 2.

{¶ 7} Accordingly, respondent's motion to dismiss is granted. Relator to pay costs. The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ. R. 58(B).

Complaint dismissed.

ANTHONY O. CALABRESE, JR., P.J., and MARY J. BOYLE, J., CONCUR.

*Page 1

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Brady v. Russo, Unpublished Decision (10-2-2007)
2007 Ohio 5333 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State Ex Rel. Washington v. McMonagle, 91477 (7-30-2008)
2008 Ohio 3798 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2008)
State Ex Rel. Aliane v. Sheward, Unpublished Decision (12-9-2003)
2003 Ohio 6554 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2003)
Sultaana v. Giant Eagle, 90130 (7-24-2007)
2007 Ohio 3769 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State Ex Rel. White v. Jewell
7 N.E.2d 410 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1937)
Gannon v. Gallagher
60 N.E.2d 660 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1945)
State ex rel. Sherrills v. State
742 N.E.2d 651 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2001)
Blankenship v. Blackwell
103 Ohio St. 3d 567 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2008 Ohio 4869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clarke-v-gallagher-91805-9-22-2008-ohioctapp-2008.