State ex rel. Nicholson v. Gall

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State ex rel. Nicholson v. Gall, 2017-Ohio-7327.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 105898 STATE OF OHIO, ON EX REL. MICHAEL NICHOLSON RELATOR vs. STEVEN E. GALL, JUDGE RESPONDENT JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED Writ of Procedendo Motion No. 508117 Order No. 509073 RELEASE DATE: August 21, 2017 FOR RELATOR Michael Nicholson, pro se Inmate No. A671-895 Lake Erie Correctional Institution P.O. Box 8000 501 Thompson Road Conneaut, Ohio 44030 ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT Michael C. O’Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: James E. Moss Assistant County Prosecutor The Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 TIM McCORMACK, P.J.: {¶1} On June 15, 2017, the relator, Michael Nicholson, commenced this procedendo action against the respondent, Judge Steven Gall, to compel the judge to rule on his motion to withdraw guilty plea, which he filed on January 10, 2017, in the underlying case, State v. Nicholson, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-15-593304-A. On June 20, 2017, the respondent judge moved for summary judgment on the grounds of mootness. Attached to the dispositive motion is a copy of a certified journal entry, filed stamped June 19, 2017, in which the judge denied Nicholson’s motion to withdraw guilty plea. Nicholson never filed a response. The June 19, 2017 journal entry establishes that the judge has proceeded to judgment on the subject motion, and this writ is moot. {¶2} Accordingly, this court grants the respondent’s motion for summary judgment and denies the application for a writ of procedendo. Respondent to pay costs; costs waived. This court directs the clerk of courts to serve all parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B). {¶3} Writ denied. TIM McCORMACK, PRESIDING JUDGE FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J., and LARRY A. JONES, SR., 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.