State ex rel. Wainwright v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.

2025 Ohio 5278

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: November 24, 2025
• Docket: 25CA012274
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Wainwright v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 2025-Ohio-5278.]

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

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. DWIGHT WAINWRIGHT

Relator C.A. No. 25CA012274 v.

STATE OF OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY ORIGINAL ACTION IN MANDAMUS

Respondent

Dated: November 24, 2025

PER CURIAM.

{¶1} Relator, Dwight Wainwright, has petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus

against Respondent, the State of Ohio Adult Parole Authority. Because Mr. Wainwright has once

again failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25, this case must be

dismissed. See State ex rel. Wainwright v. State of Ohio Adult Parole Authority, 2025-Ohio-1495

(9th Dist.).

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

action against a government employee or entity. The Adult Parole Authority is a government

entity, and, at the time he filed his petition, Mr. Wainwright was an inmate of the Lorain

Correctional Institution. R.C. 2969.21(C) and (D). A case must be dismissed if an 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, 2005-Ohio-3671, ¶ 6. 2

{¶3} Mr. Wainwright failed to pay the cost deposit required by this Court’s Local Rules.

He also failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25(C). This section requires an inmate who seeks a

waiver of the prepayment of the cost deposit to file specific, statutorily required, information.

Here, Mr. Wainwright neither prepaid the cost deposit nor sought a waiver of prepayment of the

deposit. Accordingly, this case must be dismissed. Dunkle v. Hill, 2021-Ohio-3835, ¶ 7 (failure

to pay the cost deposit or seek a waiver supported by the statutorily mandated documents requires

dismissal).

{¶4} Because Mr. Wainwright failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C.

2969.25, this case is dismissed. Further, because this case must be dismissed, this Court need not

address any defects in the complaint, including the failure to provide an address for service on

Respondent.

{¶5} Costs taxed to Mr. Wainwright. 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(B).

SCOT A. STEVENSON FOR THE COURT

CARR, J. HENSAL, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES:

DWIGHT WAINWRIGHT, Pro Se, Relator.