State ex rel. Hondo v. McGinty
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State ex rel. Hondo v. McGinty, 2010-Ohio-2900.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 94915 STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. AMUN HONDO EL RELATOR vs. JUDGE TIMOTHY MCGINTY RESPONDENT JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED Writ of Mandamus Motion No. 433043 Order No. 434815 RELEASE DATE: June 23, 2010 2 FOR RELATOR Amun Hondo El 27500 Bishop Park Drive Apt. W#406 Willoughby Hills, Ohio 44092 ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT William D. Mason Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: James Moss Assistant County Prosecutor 8th Floor Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 JAMES J. SWEENEY, J.: {¶ 1} Relator, Amun Hondo El (aka Mario Herring), is the defendant in State v. Herring, Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-508614, which has been assigned to respondent. Hondo El requests that this court issue a writ of mandamus compelling respondent judge to honor Relator s sui juris filings via Affidavits and Motions that was [sic] filed on 3/24/2010, 3/23/2010, 3/18/2010/ 3/12/2010, 3/05/2010. (Capitalization in original.) {¶ 2} Respondent has filed a motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, we grant the motion and deny Hondo El s request for relief. 3 {¶ 3} Respondent observes that Hondo El filed the identical complaint in the Supreme Court of Ohio sub nom. Hondo El v. Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga Cty., Supreme Court of Ohio Case No. 2010-0557. The complaints in both courts were filed on the same day, March 30, 2010. A review of the docket in Case No. 2010-0557 reflects that the Supreme Court granted a motion to dismiss the action on June 9, 2010. {¶ 4} It is well-established that res judicata bars an action which duplicates a previously denied action. See, e.g., State ex rel. Roberson v. Mason, Cuyahoga App. No. 91783, 2009-Ohio-1884; State ex rel. Sharif v. McDonnell (Aug. 14, 1997), Cuyahoga App. No. 72738. In light of the fact that the Supreme Court has dismissed a complaint in which Hondo El asserts the same claim, we must grant the motion for summary judgment and deny relief. {¶ 5} We also note that Hondo El requests that this court compel respondent to act on his filings made on various dates in March 2010. Yet, Hondo El filed this complaint on March 30, 2010. An action in mandamus seeking to compel a court to rule on a motion is premature if the complaint if filed fewer than 120 days after the filing of the motion. See Sup.R. 40(A)(3); State ex rel. Barksdale v. Sutula, Cuyahoga App. No. 93861, 2009-Ohio-4885. Obviously, Hondo El filed the complaint in this action prematurely. 4 {¶ 6} Accordingly, respondent s motion for summary judgment is granted. Relator to pay costs. The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58(B). {¶ 7} Writ denied. JAMES J. SWEENEY, JUDGE KENNETH A. ROCCO, P.J., and PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J., CONCUR
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.
