State ex rel. Fuller v. Sutula
This text of 2012 Ohio 4827 (State ex rel. Fuller v. Sutula) 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
[Cite as State ex rel. Fuller v. Sutula, 2012-Ohio-4827.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 98375
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. MICHAEL FULLER RELATOR
vs.
JUDGE KATHLEEN ANN SUTULA RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED
Writ of Mandamus Motion No. 456147 Order No. 459273
RELEASE DATE: October 17, 2012 FOR RELATOR
Michael Fuller, pro se Inmate No. 257-390 Grafton Correctional Institution 2500 South Avon Belden Road Grafton, OH 44044
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
BY: Charles E. Hannan Assistant Prosecuting Attorney The Justice Center, 8th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, OH 44113 SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J.:
{¶1} Relator, Michael Fuller, is the plaintiff in Fuller v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. &
Corr., Cuyahoga C.P. No. CV-768245, a declaratory judgment action. Fuller appealed
the February 16, 2012 judgment of the court of common pleas to this court, and we
dismissed that appeal for lack of a final appealable order because the trial court did not
state the basis for its decision and declare the rights of the parties. Fuller v. Ohio Dept.
of Rehab. & Corr., 8th Dist. No. 98062 (May 2, 2012).
{¶2} In this action, Fuller requests that this court compel respondent judge to issue
a final appealable order. For the reasons stated below, we deny Fuller’s request for
relief in mandamus.
{¶3} The docket in Case No. CV-768245 reflects that respondent entered judgment
on May 16, 2012. Fuller’s appeal of that judgment is now pending before this court as
Fuller v. Mohr, 8th Dist. No. 98477. He filed this action on May 18, 2012.
{¶4} Respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment attached to which is a
copy of the May 16, 2012 entry of respondent. Fuller has not opposed the motion.
Respondent contends that she has already acted and cannot be compelled to perform a
duty that she has already fulfilled. We agree. {¶5} Accordingly, respondent’s motion for summary judgment is granted. Fuller
to pay costs. This court directs the clerk of court to serve all parties notice of this
judgment and its date of entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B).
Writ denied.
SEAN C. GALLAGHER, JUDGE
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, A.J., and MARY J. BOYLE, J., CONCUR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2012 Ohio 4827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-fuller-v-sutula-ohioctapp-2012.