Johns v. Corrigan
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Johns v. Corrigan, 2006-Ohio-4502.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No. 88439 DANIELLE JOHNS Relator vs. BRIAN J. CORRIGAN, JUDGE Respondent : : : : : : : : : : ORIGINAL ACTION JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: AUGUST 25, 2006 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: WRIT OF MANDAMUS JUDGMENT: Writ Denied. Motion Nos. 386744 and 386215 Order No. 387139 APPEARANCES: For Relator: DANIELLE JOHNS, pro se Inmate No. 0168314 Cuyahoga County Jail P.O. Box 5600 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 For Respondent: WILLIAM D. MASON Cuyahoga County Prosecutor BY: KRISTEN L. LUSNIA Assistant County Prosecutor Justice Center - 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 2 JUDGE MARY EILEEN KILBANE: {¶ 1} On July 13, 2006, petitioner Danielle Johns commenced this mandamus action against Judge Brian Corrigan in which he asks this court to issue a writ of mandamus directing Judge Corrigan to bring him to trial without any further delay. Thereafter, on July 28, 2006, Judge Corrigan, through the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor s Office, filed a motion for summary judgement. a reply to the motion for summary judgment. Johns did not submit For the following reasons, we grant the motion for summary judgment. {¶ 2} Initially, we find that Johns 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. Johns failure to properly caption his petition for a writ of mandamus constitutes sufficient reason for dismissal. Allen v. Court of Common Pleas of Allen City (1962), 173 Ohio St. 226, 181 N.E.2d 270; Dunning v. Judge Cleary, et al. (Jan. 11, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 78763. {¶ 3} Johns also failed to support his complaint with an affidavit specifying the details of the claim as required by Local Rule 45(B)(1)(a). State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077; State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899. {¶ 4} Additionally, Johns failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25, which mandates that he attach an affidavit to his complaint that 3 describes each civil action or appeal of a civil action filed in the previous five years. The failure to provide such affidavit constitutes sufficient grounds for dismissal of the relator s complaint for a writ of mandamus. State ex rel. Zanders v. Ohio Parole Board, 82 Ohio St.3d 421, 1998-Ohio-218, 696 N.E.2d 594; State ex rel. Alford v. Winters, 80 Ohio St.3d 285, 1997-Ohio-117, 685 N.E.2d 1242. {¶ 5} Despite the aforesaid procedural defects, a substantive review of Johns complaint fails to establish that he is entitled to a writ of mandamus. A complaint for a writ of mandamus may not be employed to address a claim of lack of speedy trial. State ex rel. Hamilton v. Brunner, 105 Ohio St.3d 304, 2005-Ohio-1735, 825 N.E.2d 607; State ex rel. Dix v. Angelotta (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 115, 480 N.E.2d 407; State ex rel. Stadmire v. Common Pleas Court, et al., Cuyahoga App. No. 87858, 2006-Ohio-1834. The claim that Johns has been denied a speedy trial can only be addressed through a direct appeal. Jackson v. Wilson, 100 Ohio St.3d 315, 2003-Ohio- 6112, 798 N.E.2d 1086. {¶ 6} Accordingly, we grant the motion for summary judgment. Costs are hereby waived. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of Appeals serve notice of this judgment upon all parties as required by Civ.R. 58(B). Writ Denied. 4 MARY EILEEN KILBANE JUDGE ANTHONY O. CALABRESE, JR., P.J., CONCURS PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J., CONCURS
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.
