State ex rel. Baker v. Schiemann

1993 Ohio 35

• Court: Ohio Supreme Court
• Decided: October 12, 1993
• Docket: 1993-0908
• Status: Published

Opinion

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer. Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S. Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010. Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome. NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the full texts of the opinions after they have been released electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions. The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

The State ex rel. Baker, Appellant, v. Schiemann, Appellee. [Cite as State ex rel. Baker v. Schiemann (1993), Ohio St.3d .] Mandamus is not a substitute for appeal. (No. 93-908 -- Submitted July 28, 1993 -- Decided October 13, 1993.) Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 65163. Appellant, Saul P. Baker, M.D., is a pro se plaintiff in an action pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga County. He contracted with appellee, attorney Jeffrey J. Schiemann, to represent all plaintiffs in the case except himself. Appellant contends that he turned over to appellee "thousands of pages" of documents appellant had prepared for use in the case. Subsequently, appellee filed a motion to withdraw as counsel for all plaintiffs, which appellant opposed because his documents had not been returned. On January 11, 1993, the trial court granted appellee's motion to withdraw as counsel. On February 1, 1993, the court ordered appellee to produce copies of the complete file in the case to appellant, at appellant's costs. Appellant thereupon filed the instant complaint in mandamus in the court of appeals to compel appellee to return all of appellant's documents. The court of appeals dismissed the complaint sua sponte, finding that appellant had an adequate remedy via appeal from the trial court's February 1993 order. The cause is before this court upon an appeal as of right.

Saul P. Baker, M.D., pro se. Jeffrey J. Schiemann, pro se.

Per Curiam. We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. The trial court has ordered the relief appellant seeks. If he is dissatisfied, he may appeal. Mandamus is not a substitute for appeal. State ex rel. Pressley v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St.2d 141, 40 O.O. 2d 141, 228 N.E.2d 631, paragraph three of the syllabus. Judgment affirmed. Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.