State ex rel. Akemon v. Luebbers
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Akemon v. Luebbers, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-6037.] 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. 2011-OHIO-6037 THE STATE EX REL. AKEMON, APPELLANT, v. LUEBBERS, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Akemon v. Luebbers, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-6037.] Court of appeals judgment dismissing complaint for writ of mandamus affirmed. (No. 2011-1151 Submitted November 16, 2011 Decided November 30, 2011.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-110189. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the court of appeals judgment dismissing the petition of appellant, La Mon R. Akemon Jr., for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas Judge Jody M. Luebbers, to direct the clerk of the common pleas court to serve him with notice of a decision and judgment entry in the underlying case so that he can file an appeal. {¶ 2} Even if the judge did not direct the proper service of the judgment on Akemon, he is not entitled to the requested extraordinary relief in mandamus, because he has or had adequate remedies in the ordinary course of law by delayed SUPREME COURT OF OHIO appeal and motion for relief from judgment to raise such a claim. State ex rel. Halder v. Fuerst, 118 Ohio St.3d 142, 2008-Ohio-1968, 886 N.E.2d 849, ¶ 7; see also State ex rel. Ahmed v. Costine, 103 Ohio St.3d 166, 2004-Ohio-4756, 814 N.E.2d 865, ¶ 5. Contrary to Akemon s assertion, our holding in State ex rel. Sautter v. Grey, 117 Ohio St.3d 465, 2008-Ohio-1444, 884 N.E.2d 1062, does not require a different result. Judgment affirmed. O CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. __________________ La Mon R. Akemon Jr., pro se. Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Philip R. Cummings, 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.
