State Ex Rel. Bristow v. Sidoti, Unpublished Decision (12-1-2000)
State Ex Rel. Bristow v. Sidoti, Unpublished Decision (12-1-2000)
Opinion of the Court
Respondents Liz Sidoti, WCPO, WKRC, WNWO and WTOL have filed motions to dismiss arguing, inter alia, that they are private persons who are not appropriate respondents in a mandamus action. [M]andamus will not lie to enforce a private right against a private person. State ex rel. Longacre v. Penton Publishing Co. (1997),
Relator has not averred facts which establish that respondents are not private persons. As a consequence, relator has failed to state a claim upon which relief in mandamus can be granted.
Furthermore, relator failed to comply with Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) which requires that complaints in original actions be supported by an affidavit from the plaintiff or relator specifying the details of the claim.
We also note that the purported affidavit of indigency attached to the complaint contains merely relator's signature and is not notarized. The affidavit of indigency is not, therefore, sufficient to comply with the formal requirements for an affidavit. See R.C.
State ex rel. Hunter v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas (2000),
Accordingly, we grant the motions to dismiss of respondents Liz Sidoti, WCPO, WKRC, WNWO and WTOL and, in light of the fact that relator obviously cannot prevail on the facts, we dismiss this action sua sponte with regard to respondents WLWT, WTVG and WNCO. State ex rel. Thompson v. Spon (1998),
Writ dismissed.
KENNETH A. ROCCO, P.J., and JAMES D. SWEENEY, J., CONCUR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.