State ex rel. Walker v. Koch

784 N.E.2d 96, 98 Ohio St. 3d 295
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 12, 2003
DocketNo. 2002-1120
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 784 N.E.2d 96 (State ex rel. Walker v. Koch) 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. Walker v. Koch, 784 N.E.2d 96, 98 Ohio St. 3d 295 (Ohio 2003).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

J.W. Walker, pro se. William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Charles E. Hannan, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

{¶ 1} On September 19, 2001, appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge Judith Kilbane Koch, entered a judgment dismissing the remaining defendants in a civil action brought by appellant, inmate J.W. Walker. Notice of the judgment entry was issued to the parties. On November 2, 2001, Judge Kilbane Koch denied Walker’s motion for copies of the September 19, 2001 judgment and other journal entries in the case because “the docket reflects that notice was issued as to each journal entry.”

{¶ 2} On April 8, 2002, Walker filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County for a writ of procedendo to compel Judge Kilbane Koch to reenter the September 19, 2001 judgment so that he could appeal it. Judge Kilbane Koch filed a motion to dismiss. On May 23, 2002, the court of appeals granted the motion and dismissed the complaint.

{¶ 3} In his appeal as of right, Walker contends that the court erred in dismissing his complaint. He asserts that the court never served him notice of the September 19, 2001 judgment.

{¶ 4} Walker’s assertion is meritless. The docket attached to his own pleadings establishes that notice of the judgment and other journal entries was issued to all of the parties, including Walker. Procedendo will not compel the performance of a duty that has already been performed. State ex rel. Grove v. Nadel (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 252, 253, 703 N.E.2d 304; Martin v. Judges of Lucas Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 71, 72, 552 N.E.2d 906.

{¶ 5} Moreover, as Judge Kilbane Koch notes, Walker had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law by a Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment to raise his contention that he did not receive notice of the judgment. See, e.g., State ex rel. Hawk v. McCracken (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 397, 399, 604 N.E.2d 738; State ex rel. Bennett v. White (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 583, 584, 757 N.E.2d 364.

{¶ 6} Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook, Lundberg Stratton and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

Related

State ex rel. Washington v. D'Apolito (Slip Opinion)
2018 Ohio 5135 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2018)
State ex rel. Yantis v. Woods
2016 Ohio 5341 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
State ex rel. Armengau v. French
2016 Ohio 5342 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
State ex rel. Oteng v. McIntosh
2016 Ohio 3035 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
State Ex Rel Britford v. Fais, 07ap-962 (4-29-2008)
2008 Ohio 2022 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2008)
State Ex Rel. Hannah v. Reece, 07ap-950 (4-8-2008)
2008 Ohio 1680 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2008)
Ingram v. Court of Common Pleas, Unpublished Decision (10-30-2007)
2007 Ohio 5799 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State Ex Rel. Feathers v. Hayes, 2006-P-0092 (7-27-2007)
2007 Ohio 3852 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
784 N.E.2d 96, 98 Ohio St. 3d 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-walker-v-koch-ohio-2003.