Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed dismissal as moot of Richard A. Davidson’s mandamus petition seeking a free copy of his criminal trial transcript because the transcript had been provided after the action was filed. The court also denied Davidson’s motions for supplemental briefing, default judgment, judicial notice, and remand.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court of appeals properly dismissed Davidson's mandamus petition as moot after he received the trial transcript.
- Whether Davidson was entitled to default judgment because Judge Beathard did not file an appellee brief in the Supreme Court of Ohio.
- Whether the Supreme Court should consider Davidson's challenge to the court of appeals' ruling on his Civ.R. 60(B) motion or remand for reconsideration.
- Whether the Supreme Court could take judicial notice of disputed facts and legal conclusions concerning the withholding of the transcript.
Holdings
- The court of appeals properly dismissed the mandamus action as moot because Judge Beathard had performed the requested act by providing Davidson with a free copy of the trial transcript.
- Davidson was not entitled to default judgment. The Supreme Court Rules of Practice, rather than the Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure, govern appeals in the Supreme Court of Ohio, and neither applicable rule provides for default judgment merely because an appellee fails to file a brief.
- A default judgment in a mandamus action is governed by Civ.R. 55 and is available only when a defendant fails to timely plead or otherwise defend against an affirmative pleading; no default existed because Judge Beathard timely responded to the mandamus petition.
- The court declined to consider the Civ.R. 60(B) issue or remand the matter because that issue was outside the scope of the appeal, and Davidson failed to show good cause for remand.
Key quotations
“Because Judge Beathard performed the act that Davidson requested in this action—providing him with a free copy of the trial transcript—the court of appeals correctly dismissed this action as moot.” (¶ 13)
“A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel an act that has already been performed.” (¶ 13)
“A default judgment is appropriate only “against a defendant who has failed to timely plead in response to an affirmative pleading.”” (¶ 15)
Factual background
While incarcerated, Richard Davidson sought a free copy of the transcript from his criminal trial, alleging that he had been denied the transcript since 2018. Judge Beathard agreed that Davidson was entitled to a gratis copy, and the court administrator and clerk's office provided the transcript. Davidson acknowledged receiving it, but sought default judgment, a new trial, or other relief based on the alleged delay.
Procedural history
Davidson filed a mandamus action in the Twelfth District Court of Appeals seeking an order requiring Judge Beathard to provide him with a free copy of his criminal-trial transcript. After the transcript was provided, the court of appeals dismissed the action as moot and denied Davidson's motion for default judgment. Davidson appealed to the Supreme Court of Ohio and filed additional motions concerning supplemental briefing, default judgment, judicial notice, and remand.