State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan

1998 Ohio 514, 82 Ohio St. 3d 405

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 29, 1998

Docket1998-0227

StatusPublished

This text of 1998 Ohio 514 (State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan, 1998 Ohio 514, 82 Ohio St. 3d 405 (Ohio 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 82 Ohio St.3d 405.]

THE STATE EX REL. EADS, APPELLANT, v. CALLAHAN, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan, 1998-Ohio-514.] Mandamus to compel common pleas court judge to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on relator’s petition for postconviction relief—Writ denied when act already performed. (No. 98-227—Submitted May 26, 1998—Decided July 29, 1998.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 73265. __________________ {¶ 1} In October 1997, appellant, Daniel T. Eads, filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus in the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge Kenneth R. Callahan, to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on Eads’s petition for postconviction relief. Eads did not file an accompanying affidavit specifying the details of his mandamus claim, as required by Loc.App.R. 8(B)(1). Judge Callahan subsequently issued findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Eads’s petition for postconviction relief. {¶ 2} The court of appeals granted Judge Callahan’s motion for summary judgment and denied the writ. The court of appeals held that the mandamus action was moot and that Eads did not comply with Loc.App.R. 8(B)(1). {¶ 3} This cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right. __________________ Daniel T. Eads, pro se. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Daniel M. Margolis, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. __________________ SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its opinion. A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel an act already performed. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 279, 658 N.E.2d 723, 724. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 82 Ohio St.3d 405.]

THE STATE EX REL. EADS, APPELLANT, v. CALLAHAN, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan, 1998-Ohio-514.] Mandamus to compel common pleas court judge to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on relator’s petition for postconviction relief—Writ denied when act already performed. (No. 98-227—Submitted May 26, 1998—Decided July 29, 1998.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 73265. __________________ {¶ 1} In October 1997, appellant, Daniel T. Eads, filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus in the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge Kenneth R. Callahan, to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law on Eads’s petition for postconviction relief. Eads did not file an accompanying affidavit specifying the details of his mandamus claim, as required by Loc.App.R. 8(B)(1). Judge Callahan subsequently issued findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Eads’s petition for postconviction relief. {¶ 2} The court of appeals granted Judge Callahan’s motion for summary judgment and denied the writ. The court of appeals held that the mandamus action was moot and that Eads did not comply with Loc.App.R. 8(B)(1). {¶ 3} This cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right. __________________ Daniel T. Eads, pro se. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Daniel M. Margolis, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. __________________ SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

Per Curiam. {¶ 4} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its opinion. A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel an act already performed. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 279, 658 N.E.2d 723, 724. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1998 Ohio 514, 82 Ohio St. 3d 405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-eads-v-callahan-ohio-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack