State ex rel. DeDonno v. Mason
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. DeDonno v. Mason, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-1445.] 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-1445 THE STATE EX REL. DEDONNO, APPELLANT, v. MASON, JUDGE, APPELLEE. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. DeDonno v. Mason, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-1445.] A dismissal other than on the merits ordinarily does not prevent a party from refiling the action and thus is ordinarily not a final, appealable order Court of appeals judgment denying writ of mandamus to compel judge to issue a final, appealable order affirmed. (No. 2010-1903 Submitted March 23, 2011 Decided March 31, 2011.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, Nos. 95431 and 95498, 2010-Ohio-4903. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying appellant Gregory Smith DeDonno s request for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Judge Lance T. Mason, to issue a final, appealable order in a civil case instituted by DeDonno. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO {¶ 2} Judge Mason acted within his discretion to dismiss the case because of DeDonno s failure to comply with a court order. See Civ.R. 41(B)(1). The action was dismissed without prejudice, which, by rule, is not a final, appealable order. See Civ.R. 41(B)(3). Ordinarily, a dismissal other than on the merits does not prevent a party from refiling and, therefore, ordinarily, such a dismissal is not a final, appealable order. Natl. City Commercial Capital Corp. v. AAAA At Your Service, Inc., 114 Ohio St.3d 82, 2007-Ohio-2942, 868 N.E.2d 663, ¶ 8. Extraordinary relief in mandamus is thus not available. Judgment affirmed. O CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. __________________ Gregory Smith DeDonno, pro se. William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Charles E. Hannan, 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.
