Zanders v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Zanders v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2003-Ohio-2973.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO LAWRENCE ZANDERS : Plaintiff : v. : CASE NO. 2002-08891-AD : ENTRY OF DISMISSAL OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION : Defendant : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : {¶1} THE COURT FINDS THAT: {¶2} 1) On September 30, 2002, plaintiff, Lawrence Zanders, filed a complaint against defendant, Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. erred in Plaintiff believes the Rules Infraction Board finding him guilty of a Class II rules violation. Plaintiff asserts there was not sufficient evidence for the Rules Infraction Board to reach a finding of guilty. damages in the amount of $2,500.00. Plaintiff seeks Plaintiff submitted the filing fee with the complaint; {¶3} 2) On December 2, 2002, defendant filed a motion to 3) In support of the motion to dismiss, defendant dismiss; {¶4} stated in pertinent part: {¶5} Plaintiff s action should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because an inmate s appeal of a Rules Infraction Board decision does not relate to civil law. present case, the Rules Infraction Board decided to In the suspend disciplinary control confinement for plaintiff and send him to committee for job reclassification. This court has previously held that it has no jurisdiction over decision of the Rules Infraction Board. Conan v. Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, (July 2, 1987), Court of Claims Case No. 86-04018-AD, unreported . . . Fox v. Marion Correctional Institution, (March 22, 1982), Court of Claims Case No. 83-07504-AD, unreported. Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is, therefore, applicable in this case ; {¶6} 4) On December 12, 2002, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to submit a memorandum contra to defendant s motion to dismiss; {¶7} 5) On December 19, 2002, plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal without prejudice. {¶8} IT IS ORDERED THAT: {¶9} 1) Defendant s motion to dismiss is MOOT; {¶10} 2) Plaintiff s motion for extension of time is MOOT; {¶11} 3) Plaintiff s notice is considered a motion for voluntary dismissal and is GRANTED; {¶12} 4) Plaintiff s case is DISMISSED without prejudice; {¶13} 5) Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. ________________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk Entry cc: Lawrence Zanders 2500 South Avon-Belden Road Grafton, Ohio 44044 Plaintiff, Pro se Steven A. Young, Legal Counsel Department of Rehabilitation 1050 Freeway Drive North Columbus, Ohio 43229 For Defendant DRB/tad 5/6 Filed 5/22/03 Sent to S.C. reporter 6/11/03
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
