State ex rel. Hale v. Spatny

2024 Ohio 2025

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: May 28, 2024
• Docket: 24CA012116
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Hale v. Spatny, 2024-Ohio-2025.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN )

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JOSHUA E. HALE C.A. No. 24CA012116 Petitioner

v. ORIGINAL ACTION IN JERRY SPATNY, WARDEN HABEAS CORPUS

Respondent

Dated: May 28, 2024

PER CURIAM.

{¶1} Petitioner Joshua E. Hale has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus asking this

Court to order Respondent Jerry Spatny, Warden of Grafton Correctional Institution, to release

him from prison. Because Mr. Hale failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C.

2969.25, this case must be dismissed.

{¶2} R.C. 2969.25 sets forth specific filing requirements for inmates who file a civil

action against a government employee or entity. Warden Spatny is a government employee and

Mr. Hale, incarcerated in the Grafton Correctional Institution, is an inmate. R.C. 2969.21(C) and

(D). A case must be dismissed if the inmate fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of

R.C. 2969.25 in the commencement of the action. State ex rel. Graham v. Findlay Mun. Court,

106 Ohio St.3d 63, 2005-Ohio-3671, ¶ 6 (“The requirements of R.C. 2969.25 are mandatory, and

failure to comply with them subjects an inmate’s action to dismissal.”). C.A. No. 24CA012116 Page 2 of 3

{¶3} One of the requirements established by R.C. 2969.25 applies when a prisoner files

an action and requests waiver of the prepayment of the cost of the action. Mr. Hale failed to file a

statement of his prisoner trust account that complied with the requirements of the statute.

{¶4} Mr. Hale did not pay the cost deposit required by this Court’s Local Rules. He also

failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C), which sets forth specific requirements for an inmate who

seeks to proceed without paying the cost deposit. Mr. Hale did not file a statement of his prisoner

trust account that sets forth the balance in his inmate account for each of the preceding six months,

as certified by the institutional cashier. Mr. Banks’ filed a statement that included the average

balance of his account for six months, not the balance for each of the six months, as required by

R.C. 2969.25(C). Further, the time period covered by the statement was not the six months

immediately preceding the month in which the action was filed, also in violation of R.C.

2969.25(C).

{¶5} The Supreme Court’s decisions make clear that R.C. 2969.25(C) does not permit

substantial compliance. See, e.g., State ex rel. Roden v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 159 Ohio

St.3d 314, 2020-Ohio-408, ¶ 8. The Supreme Court has “affirmed dismissals of inmate actions

when the inmate had failed to submit the account statement required by R.C. 2969.25(C)(1).” Id.

{¶6} Mr. Hale failed to file a statement of his prisoner trust account as required by R.C.

2969.25(C). Because Mr. Hale did not comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25,

this case is dismissed. C.A. No. 24CA012116 Page 3 of 3

{¶7} Costs are taxed to Mr. Hale. The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon

all parties not in default notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. See Civ.R.

58.

BETTY SUTTON FOR THE COURT

HENSAL, J. FLAGG LANZINGER, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES:

JOSHUA E. HALE, Pro se, Petitioner.