State ex rel. Watley v. Pfeiffer

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Watley v. Pfeiffer, Slip Opinion No. 2009-Ohio-5587.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published. SLIP OPINION NO. 2009-OHIO-5587 THE STATE EX REL. WATLEY, APPELLANT, v. PFEIFFER, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Watley v. Pfeiffer, Slip Opinion No. 2009-Ohio-5587.] Mandamus Vexatious litigator R.C. 2323.52 Failure to seek leave to file action requires dismissal Judgment affirmed. (No. 2009-0965 Submitted October 20, 2009 Decided October 28, 2009.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 09AP-328. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Rayshon Watley, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Beverly Pfeiffer, to file an action Watley describes as a 1983 civil action. Watley, who has been declared to be a vexatious litigator, did not seek leave of the court of appeals to proceed with filing his mandamus action, and the court of appeals was thus required to SUPREME COURT OF OHIO dismiss the action. R.C. 2323.52(F)(2) and (I); State ex rel. Sapp v. Franklin Cty. Court of Appeals, 118 Ohio St.3d 368, 2008-Ohio-2637, 889 N.E.2d 500, ¶ 19-20. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O CONNOR, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. __________________ Rayshon Watley, pro se. Ron O Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Patrick J. Piccininni, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. ______________________ 2

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.