State Ex Rel. McKay v. Corrigan, Unpublished Decision (9-8-2006)

Ohio Court of Appeals

State Ex Rel. McKay v. Corrigan, Unpublished Decision (9-8-2006)

2006 Ohio 4775

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 8, 2006

DocketNo. 88340.

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2006 Ohio 4775 (State Ex Rel. McKay v. Corrigan, Unpublished Decision (9-8-2006)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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. McKay v. Corrigan, Unpublished Decision (9-8-2006), 2006 Ohio 4775 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION {¶ 1} Eric McKay has filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus. McKay alleges that he has been deprived of his right to a speedy trial, by Judge Brian Corrigan, in State v. McKay, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-475252. Judge Corrigan has filed a motion for summary judgment, which we grant for the following reasons.

{¶ 2} Initially, we find that McKay has failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25, which requires the attachment of an affidavit to the complaint for a writ of mandamus that describes each civil action or appeal filed within the previous five years in any state or federal court. McKay's failure to comply with R.C.2969.25 warrants the dismissal of his complaint for a writ of mandamus. State ex rel. Zanders v. Ohio Parole Bd.,82 Ohio St.3d 421, 1998-Ohio-218, 696 N.E.2d 594, State ex rel. Alfordv. Winters, 80 Ohio St.3d 285, 1997-Ohio-117, 685 N.E.2d 1242.

{¶ 3} In addition, McKay has failed to comply with Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) which requires that the complaint for a writ of mandamus must be supported by an affidavit that specifies the details of the claim. The failure of McKay to comply with the supporting affidavit requirement of Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) requires dismissal of the complaint for a writ of mandamus.State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899; State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077.

{¶ 4} Finally, McKay's claim that he has been denied the right to a speedy trial, is not cognizable in an extraordinary-writ proceeding. The denial of the right to a speedy trial can only be addressed through an appeal. SeeJackson v. Wilson, 100 Ohio St.3d 315, 2003-Ohio-6112,798 N.E.2d 1086; State ex rel. Dix v. Angelotta (1985),18 Ohio St.3d 115, 480 N.E.2d 407.

{¶ 5} Accordingly, we grant Judge Corrigan's motion for summary judgment. Costs waived. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of Appeals serve notice of this judgment upon all parties as mandated by Civ.R. 58(B).

Writ denied.

Gallagher, P.J., Concurs Blackmon, J., Concurs.

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

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION {¶ 1} Eric McKay has filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus. McKay alleges that he has been deprived of his right to a speedy trial, by Judge Brian Corrigan, in State v. McKay, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-475252. Judge Corrigan has filed a motion for summary judgment, which we grant for the following reasons.

{¶ 2} Initially, we find that McKay has failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25, which requires the attachment of an affidavit to the complaint for a writ of mandamus that describes each civil action or appeal filed within the previous five years in any state or federal court. McKay's failure to comply with R.C.2969.25 warrants the dismissal of his complaint for a writ of mandamus. State ex rel. Zanders v. Ohio Parole Bd.,82 Ohio St.3d 421, 1998-Ohio-218, 696 N.E.2d 594, State ex rel. Alfordv. Winters, 80 Ohio St.3d 285, 1997-Ohio-117, 685 N.E.2d 1242.

{¶ 3} In addition, McKay has failed to comply with Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) which requires that the complaint for a writ of mandamus must be supported by an affidavit that specifies the details of the claim. The failure of McKay to comply with the supporting affidavit requirement of Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) requires dismissal of the complaint for a writ of mandamus.State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899; State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077.

{¶ 4} Finally, McKay's claim that he has been denied the right to a speedy trial, is not cognizable in an extraordinary-writ proceeding. The denial of the right to a speedy trial can only be addressed through an appeal. SeeJackson v. Wilson, 100 Ohio St.3d 315, 2003-Ohio-6112,798 N.E.2d 1086; State ex rel. Dix v. Angelotta (1985),18 Ohio St.3d 115, 480 N.E.2d 407.

{¶ 5} Accordingly, we grant Judge Corrigan's motion for summary judgment. Costs waived. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of Appeals serve notice of this judgment upon all parties as mandated by Civ.R. 58(B).

Writ denied.

Gallagher, P.J., Concurs Blackmon, J., Concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2006 Ohio 4775, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-mckay-v-corrigan-unpublished-decision-9-8-2006-ohioctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack