State ex rel. Barnett v. Fleegle

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as State ex rel. Barnett v. Fleegle, 2017-Ohio-269.] COURT OF APPEALS MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO, ex rel. WILLIAM BARNETT Relator JUDGES: Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, P. J. Hon. W. Scott Gwin, J. Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. -vsCase No. CT2016-0020 MUSKINGUM COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT, JUDGE FLEEGLE Respondent OPINION CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Petition for Writ of Mandamus JUDGMENT: Dismissed DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: January 24, 2017 APPEARANCES: For Relator For Respondent WILLIAM J. BARNETT HOCKING CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 16759 Snake Hollow Road P.O. Box 59 Nelsonville, Ohio 45764-0059 D. MICHAEL HADDOX PROSECUTING ATTORNEY GERALD V. ANDERSON II ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR 27 North Fifth Street, P.O. Box 189 Zanesville, Ohio 43702-0189 Muskingum County, Case No. CT2016-0020 2 Wise, J. {¶1} Relator, William Barnett, has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus requesting this Court to order Respondent to rule on four motions filed in the trial court on October 23, 2015 and November 18, 2015. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss indicating he issued a ruling on the motions on May 26, 2016. {¶2} For a writ of mandamus to issue, the Relator must have a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, the Respondent must be under a clear legal duty to perform the requested act, and Relator must have no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. State, ex rel. Berger, v. McMonagle (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 28, 6 OBR 50, 451 N.E.2d 225. {¶3} However, the Supreme Court has held mandamus will not issue where the requested relief has been obtained, “Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the performance of a duty that has already been performed.” State ex rel. Kreps v. Christiansen (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 313, 318, 725 N.E.2d 663, 668. {¶4} Because Respondent has issued a ruling on Relator’s motions, the request for a writ of mandamus has become moot. For this reason, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is dismissed. By: Wise, J. Farmer, P. J., and Gwin, J., concur. JWW/d 0106

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.