Iverson v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., Unpublished Decision (7-7-2004)
Iverson v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., Unpublished Decision (7-7-2004)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} In order for this court to issue a writ of mandamus, a relator must establish that: 1) the relator possesses a clear legal right to the relief prayed; 2) the respondent possesses a clear legal duty to perform the requested act; and 3) the relator possesses no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State ex rel. Manson v. Morris (1993),
{¶ 3} We also find that relator failed to comply with Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a), which provides that all complaints must contain the specific statements of fact upon which the the claim of illegality is based and must be supported by an affidavit from the plaintiff or relator specifying the details of the claim.State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077; State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899.
{¶ 4} Additionally, we find that Iverson's petition as to his request for a writ of mandamus is defective since it is improperly captioned. A petition for a writ of mandamus must be brought in the name of the state, on relation of the person applying. Iverson's failure to properly caption his petition as to the writ of mandamus constitutes sufficient reason for dismissal. Allen v. Court of Common Pleas of Allen Cty. (1962),
{¶ 5} Iverson also failed to comply with R.C.
{¶ 6} Accordingly, we grant the respondent's motion to dismiss and dismiss the petition. Relator to pay costs.
Complaint Dismissed.
Celebrezze, Jr., P.J., Concurs McMonagle, J., Concurs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.