State ex rel. Conomy v. Fuller

2025 Ohio 4411 · Supreme Court of Ohio · September 24, 2025 · No. 2024-1745

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed the dismissal of a writ of mandamus petition brought by a father seeking to compel a domestic relations judge to grant him child custody. The court held that mandamus cannot be used to control a judge's discretionary rulings or substitute for an ordinary appeal, which remains an adequate remedy upon issuance of a final custody order. Consequently, the court also denied the petitioner's request for statutory damages under R.C. 2731.11 and rejected several ancillary procedural motions filed during the appeal.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Kennedy, C.J.; Fischer; DEWINE; BRUNNER; DETERS; HAWKINS; SHANAHAN
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
September 24, 2025
Docket number
2024-1745
Procedural posture
Mandamus action seeking to compel Judge Fuller to rescind order denying custody motion; appeal from Fifth District Court of Appeals dismissal of mandamus petition.
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
State ex rel. Conomy v. Fuller, Judge
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

family lawchild custodyappellate procedurecivil procedurefamily law procedure

Practice areas

family lawcivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Conomy’s mandamus petition states a claim for mandamus relief.
  2. Whether the Fifth District Court erred in dismissing the mandamus petition.
  3. Whether Conomy is entitled to damages under R.C. 2731.11.

Holdings

  1. Conomy failed to state a claim for mandamus relief; the Fifth District Court’s dismissal is affirmed.
  2. Conomy is not entitled to damages because a relator may recover damages only if the mandamus petition is successful.

Key quotations

While a writ of mandamus may be warranted to compel a lower court to act, R.C. 2731.03, it cannot be used to control judicial discretion, even if that discretion has been abused, State ex rel. Rashada v. Pianka, 2006-Ohio-6366, ¶ 3. (¶ 19)
The availability of an appeal constitutes an adequate remedy at law that precludes a writ of mandamus. (¶ 20)

Factual background

Conomy is a parent in a divorce proceeding before Judge Fuller, contesting custody of two minor children. After a temporary custody arrangement with the children’s maternal grandmother, Conomy’s motion to expand visitation and an emergency‑custody motion were denied. Conomy then filed a mandamus petition seeking unrestricted custody and damages, which the Fifth District dismissed.

Procedural history

Conomy filed a mandamus petition in the Fifth District Court of Appeals after Judge Fuller denied his custody motion. The district court dismissed the petition for lack of a final appealable order and for seeking to control judicial discretion. Conomy appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…