From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex Rel. Allen v. Fleegle

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Muskingum County
Oct 20, 2011
2011 Ohio 5458 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011)

Opinion

Case No. CT2011-0045

10-20-2011

STATE EX REL. JOHN DALE ALLEN Petitioner v. MARK C. FLEEGLE, et al. Respondents

For Petitioner JOHN DALE ALLEN For Respondents JUDGE MARK FLEEGLE


JUDGES:

Hon. , P.J.

Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J.

Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J.

OPINION

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Mandamus

JUDGMENT: Dismissed

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: October 20, 2011

APPEARANCES:

For Petitioner

JOHN DALE ALLEN

For Respondents

JUDGE MARK FLEEGLE

Wise, P. J.

{¶1} Relator, John Dale Allen, has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus requesting this Court issue a writ ordering Respondents, Judge Mark C. Fleegle and Judge Jay F. Vinsel, to release Relator from incarceration due to Relator's medical condition.

{¶2} Initially, we find Relator has failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25 by not filing an affidavit detailing his prior civil filings. We will nonetheless address the merits of Relator's Petition.

{¶3} "A writ of mandamus will not be issued where there is a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. R.C. 2731.05. A civil rights action under Section 1983, Title 42, U.S.Code constitutes an adequate legal remedy which precludes extraordinary relief where state prisoners challenge the conditions of their confinement and their claims are limited to alleged violation of their federal constitutional and statutory rights. State ex rel. Carter v. Schotten (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 89, 91-92, 637 N.E.2d 306, 309. Section 1983 constitutes an adequate remedy, since it can provide declaratory, injunctive (both mandatory and prohibitive), and/or monetary relief. 1 Schwartz & Kirklin, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims, Defenses, and Fees (2 Ed.1991) 830, Section 16.1." State ex rel. Peeples v. Anderson (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 559, 560, 653 N.E.2d 371, 373.

{¶4} "Sua sponte dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is appropriate if the complaint is frivolous or the claimant obviously cannot prevail on the facts alleged in the complaint. State ex rel. Bruggeman v. Ingraham (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 230, 231, 718 N.E.2d 1285, 1287." State ex rel. Kreps v. Christiansen (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 313, 316, 725 N.E.2d 663, 667.

{¶5} Because it is evident from the Complaint that Relator has or had an adequate remedy at law by way of a civil rights action under Section 1983, Title 42, U.S.Code, we will not issue the requested writ of mandamus and dismiss this cause for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

By: Wise, P. J.

Edwards and Delaney, JJ., concur.

JUDGES

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

STATE EX REL. JOHN DALE ALLEN Petitioner

v.

MARK C. FLEEGLE, et al. Respondents

JUDGMENT ENTRY

Case No. CT2011-0045

For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

JUDGES


Summaries of

State ex Rel. Allen v. Fleegle

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Muskingum County
Oct 20, 2011
2011 Ohio 5458 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011)
Case details for

State ex Rel. Allen v. Fleegle

Case Details

Full title:State Ex Rel. John Dale Allen Petitioner v. Mark C. Fleegle, et al…

Court:Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Muskingum County

Date published: Oct 20, 2011

Citations

2011 Ohio 5458 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011)