State ex rel. Robinson v. Adult Parole Auth.

96 N.E.3d 283, 152 Ohio St. 3d 391, 2018 Ohio 558
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 24, 2018
DocketNo. 2016–1181
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 96 N.E.3d 283 (State ex rel. Robinson v. Adult Parole Auth.) 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. Robinson v. Adult Parole Auth., 96 N.E.3d 283, 152 Ohio St. 3d 391, 2018 Ohio 558 (Ohio 2018).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

*391{¶ 1} Appellant, Damon Robinson, commenced this action in the Tenth District *284Court of Appeals seeking a writ of mandamus against appellee, Ohio Adult Parole Authority. The court of appeals referred the case to a magistrate, and on July 25, 2016, the magistrate purported to dismiss the petition sua sponte. On November 30, 2017, we affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals. --- Ohio St.3d ----, 2017-Ohio-8721, --- N.E.3d ----.

{¶ 2} Upon further consideration, however, we conclude that we lacked jurisdiction to hear and decide the case. Proceedings before a magistrate are governed by Civ.R. 53, as expressly incorporated by Loc.R. 13(M)(1) of the Tenth District Court of Appeals. Under that rule, a "magistrate's decision is not effective unless adopted by the court." Civ.R. 53(D)(4)(a). For this reason, a magistrate's decision, standing alone, is not a final, appealable order. See State ex rel. Boddie v. Franklin Cty. 911 Admr. , 135 Ohio St.3d 248, 2013-Ohio-401, 985 N.E.2d 1263. Because the court of appeals did not adopt the magistrate's decision, Robinson never received a final, appealable order.

*392{¶ 3} We hereby withdraw the prior opinion and order it withdrawn from official publication. It therefore has no precedential value. See In re Adoption of Ridenour , 61 Ohio St.3d 319, 327, 574 N.E.2d 1055 (1991), fn. 6. We dismiss this appeal for lack of a final, appealable order.

Cause dismissed.

O'Connor, C.J., and French, O'Neill, Fischer, and DeWine, JJ., concur.

O'Donnell and Kennedy, JJ., concur in judgment only.

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

Related

Tanner v. Robinson
2025 Ohio 1938 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2025)
State v. Jackson
2022 Ohio 1823 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 N.E.3d 283, 152 Ohio St. 3d 391, 2018 Ohio 558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-robinson-v-adult-parole-auth-ohio-2018.