Stadmire v. Common Pleas Ct. Cuyahoga Cty., 90746 (1-28-2008)
This text of 2008 Ohio 309 (Stadmire v. Common Pleas Ct. Cuyahoga Cty., 90746 (1-28-2008)) 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.
Opinion
{¶ 2} On December 13, 2007, the respondent, through the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, moved for summary judgment on the grounds of mootness. Attached to this dispositive motion was a certified copy of a December 14, 2007 journal entry which denied the subject motion. Stadmire never filed a response. The journal entry establishes that the respondent court has proceeded to judgment on the subject motion, and that this application for a writ of procedendo is moot.
{¶ 3} Additionally, Stadmire failed to support his complaint with an affidavit "specifying the details of the claim" as required by Loc. Rule 45(B)(1)(a). State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077, and State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899.
{¶ 4} He has also failed to comply with R.C.
{¶ 5} Accordingly, the court denies the writ. Costs assessed against the petitioner. 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).
COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, PRESIDING JUDGE
*Page 1CHRISTINE T. MCMONAGLE, J., and MARY J. BOYLE, J., CONCUR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2008 Ohio 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stadmire-v-common-pleas-ct-cuyahoga-cty-90746-1-28-2008-ohioctapp-2008.