State v. Kilbane, Unpublished Decision (12-7-2001)
State v. Kilbane, Unpublished Decision (12-7-2001)
Opinion of the Court
As established by the attached journal entries the subject motions have been resolved. The court granted seventy-five days of jail time credit in Case No. CR-341348 and thirty-six days of jail time credit Case No. Cr. 342195. Thus, this mandamus action is moot. The rulings on the motions have fulfilled the court's duty and granted the relator all the relief he could obtain through mandamus. The requisites for mandamus are well established: (1) the relator must have a clear legal right to the requested relief; (2) the respondent must have a clear legal duty to perform the requested relief; and (3) there must be no adequate remedy at law. Additionally, although mandamus may be used to compel a court to exercise judgment or to discharge a function, it may not control judicial discretion, even if that discretion is grossly abused. State ex rel. Ney v. Niehaus (1987),
Additionally, the relator failed to support his complaint with an affidavit specifying the details of the claim as required by Loc.R. 45(B)(1)(a). State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077, unreported and State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899, unreported.
The relator has also failed to comply with R.C.
Accordingly, the court denies the writ. Costs assessed against the relator. The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. Civ.R. 58(B).
PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, P.J., and COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J., CONCUR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.