Mahalli v. Williams-Byers

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Mahalli v. Williams-Byers, 2019-Ohio-4169.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA SAID ISAAC MAHALLI, Relator, : : No. 108804 v. : THE HONORABLE GAYLE WILIAMSBYERS, : Respondent. : JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION JUDGMENT: COMPLAINTS DISMISSED DATED: October 9, 2019 Writs of Mandamus and Procedendo Order No. 532379 Appearances: Michael J. Goldberg, for relator. MARY J. BOYLE, P.J.: On July 16, 2019, the relator, Said Isaac Mahalli, commenced this mandamus and procedendo action against the respondent, Judge Gayle WilliamsByers, to compel the judge to rule on a motion for new trial, which Mahalli filed on April 22, 2019, in the underlying case, S. Euclid v. Mahalli, South Euclid M.C. No. CRB 1700178A. A review of the docket in the underlying case reveals that the trial court denied the subject motion for new trial on July 31, 2019. Therefore, Mahalli has received his requested relief, and the trial court fulfilled its duty to proceed to judgment on the subject motion. This writ action is moot. The petition is defective because it is improperly captioned. Mahalli styled this petition as “Said Isaac Mahalli v. the Honorable Gayle Willams-Byers.” R.C. 2731.04 requires that an application for a writ of mandamus “must be by petition, in the name of the state on the relation of the person applying.” This failure to properly caption a mandamus action is sufficient grounds for dismissing the mandamus claim. Maloney v. Court of Common Pleas of Allen Cty., 173 Ohio St. 226, 181 N.E.2d 270 (1962). Accordingly, the court dismisses the application for writs of mandamus or procedendo. Relator to pay costs. 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). Complaints dismissed. _______________________________ MARY J. BOYLE, PRESIDING JUDGE FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J., and MICHELLE J. SHEEHAN, 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.