State ex rel. Fagan v. Saffold

2014 Ohio 1089
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 14, 2014
Docket100882
StatusPublished

This text of 2014 Ohio 1089 (State ex rel. Fagan v. Saffold) 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
State ex rel. Fagan v. Saffold, 2014 Ohio 1089 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Fagan v. Saffold, 2014-Ohio-1089.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 100882

STATE EX REL., JOHNATHAN FAGAN RELATOR

vs.

JUDGE SHIRLEY STRICKLAND SAFFOLD RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED

Writ of Mandamus Motion No. 471929 Order No. 472676

RELEASE DATE: March 14, 2014 FOR RELATOR

Johnathan Fagan, pro se Inmate No. 602-079 Lake Erie Correctional Institution P.O. Box 8000 Conneaut, Ohio 44030-8000

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT

Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor 8th Floor Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J.:

{¶1} On January 14, 2014, the relator, Johnathan Fagan, commenced this

mandamus action against the respondent, Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold, to compel the

judge to resolve the issue of jail-time credit, in the underlying case, State v. Fagan,

Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-546219. On January 31, 2014, the respondent moved for

summary judgment on the grounds of mootness. Attached to the dispositive motion was

a certified copy of a signed and file-stamped January 22, 2014 journal entry granting 117

days of jail-time credit in the underlying case. Fagan did not timely file a response to

the motion for summary judgment. This establishes that the relator has received his

requested relief and that the action is, therefore, moot. State ex rel. Corder v. Wilson, 68

Ohio App.3d 567, 589 N.E.2d 113 (10th Dist.1991).

{¶2} Accordingly, the court grants the respondent’s motion for summary

judgment and denies the application for a writ of mandamus. Costs assessed against

respondent; costs waived. 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).

{¶3} Writ denied.

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, JUDGE

SEAN C. GALLAGHER, P.J., and MELODY J. STEWART, J., CONCUR

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

Related

State, Ex Rel. Corder v. Wilson
589 N.E.2d 113 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2014 Ohio 1089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-fagan-v-saffold-ohioctapp-2014.