Emery v. Toledo Municipal Court, Unpublished Decision (8-27-2001)
Emery v. Toledo Municipal Court, Unpublished Decision (8-27-2001)
Opinion of the Court
We find, however, that petitioner fails to identify the proper parties to this action. Petitioner's petition for writ of mandamus moves us to require a judge to take certain action; however, no common pleas court judge was named in this action and none was served. It is improper to name the entire Lucas County Court of Common Pleas and the clerk of courts' office is not the proper party to be served in this action.
Accordingly, insofar as the proper party or parties have not been identified or served with this petition, we sua sponte dismiss petitioner's petition for writ of mandamus or, alternatively, writ for prohibition.
Based on the foregoing, we also deny petitioner's "Motion for stay (pending determination of petition)," filed on August 15, 2001.
Costs assessed to petitioner.
Peter M. Handwork, J., James R. Sherck, J. and Richard W. Knepper, J. CONCUR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.