State ex rel. Turner v. Corrigan

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of Donald Turner's mandamus petition seeking a de novo resentencing by Judge Brian Corrigan. Although the court held that the Eighth District's affidavit requirement conflicted with the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, it concluded that Turner had an adequate remedy at law through a discretionary appeal, precluding mandamus relief.

Holdings

1. The Eighth District's local rule requiring a mandamus complaint to be supported by an affidavit is unenforceable to the extent it conflicts with Civ.R. 11, which provides that pleadings need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit.
2. Turner had an adequate remedy at law through a discretionary appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio, which precluded issuance of a writ of mandamus even though the Supreme Court declined to accept his appeal.
3. The Eighth District did not dismiss Turner's petition on mootness grounds; it merely acknowledged that Judge Corrigan had asserted mootness as a defense.
4. Turner's challenge to the use of unauthenticated summary-judgment materials lacked merit because the court did not need evidentiary materials to determine that the affidavit was defective or that the petition failed to state a mandamus claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Eighth District could dismiss Turner's mandamus petition for failure to comply with its local rule requiring an affidavit.
2. Whether Turner had an adequate remedy at law that precluded issuance of a writ of mandamus.
3. Whether the Eighth District's reference to mootness constituted an independent basis for dismissal.
4. Whether the use of unauthenticated Civ.R. 56(C) materials warranted reversal of the judgment.

Disposition

affirmed