Opinion
CASE NO. 14-CA-18
02-10-2015
ROY HART Relator v. MICHAEL GROH Respondent
APPEARANCES: For Relator: Roy Hart #A686615 N.C.C.C 670 Marion-Williamsport Rd. E P.O. Box 1812 Marion, Ohio 43301-1812 For Respondent: Attorney Michael Groh 954 Wheeling Avenue #37 Cambridge, Ohio 43725
JUDGES: Hon., John W. Wise P.J. Hon., Patricia A. Delaney Hon., Craig R. Baldwin
OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Mandamus JUDGMENT: Dismissed APPEARANCES: For Relator: Roy Hart #A686615
N.C.C.C
670 Marion-Williamsport Rd. E
P.O. Box 1812
Marion, Ohio 43301-1812
For Respondent: Attorney Michael Groh
954 Wheeling Avenue #37
Cambridge, Ohio 43725
Delaney, J.
{¶1} This matter comes before the Court upon Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. Relator has not filed a response to the motion.
{¶2} The petition filed in this case requested an order from this Court requiring Respondent to turn over Respondent's file to Relator. Respondent indicates that the file has now been turned over to Relator making the petition moot. We agree the petition is now moot. A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel an act already performed. State ex rel. Jerninghan v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 279, 658 N.E.2d 723, 724.
{¶3} We also find dismissal is proper because "relator's petition is defective since it is improperly captioned. The complaint for an extraordinary writ must be brought by petition, in the name of the state on relation of the person applying. Relator's failure to properly caption his petition for a writ of mandamus constitutes sufficient reason for dismissal. Allen v. Court of Common Pleas of Allen County (1962), 173 Ohio St. 226, 181 N.E.2d 270; Dunning v.. Judge Cleary, et al. (Jan. 11, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 78763." Ringel v. Case W. Res. Univ., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 82042, 2003-Ohio-186.
{¶4} For these reasons, we grant the motion to dismiss.
MOTION GRANTED.
CAUSE DISMISSED.
COSTS TO RELATOR. By: Delaney, J.
Wise, P.J. and
Baldwin, J. concur