Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the mandamus action filed by appellant, Alan Williams. In the absence of a patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction on the part of the judge to whom a case was allegedly transferred, Williams has an adequate remedy by appeal to challenge the transfer of the case to the judge. See State ex rel. Carr v. McDonnell, 124 Ohio St.3d 62, 2009-Ohio-6165, 918 N.E.2d 1004; State ex rel. Key v. Spicer (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 469, 746 N.E.2d 1119 (“a claim of improper assignment of a judge can generally be adequately raised by way of appeal”). Williams did not allege sufficient facts to indicate any jurisdictional defect, much less a patent and unambiguous one. We also deny Williams's motion for oral argument.
Judgment affirmed.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 2009-2295.
Decided: May 19, 2010
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)