State v. McGinty, Unpublished Decision (2-16-2007)
State v. McGinty, Unpublished Decision (2-16-2007)
2007 Ohio 710
State v. McGinty, Unpublished Decision (2-16-2007)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} The attached journal entry establishes that the respondent judge has performed his duty to rule on the subject motion and that Mills has received his requested relief. Therefore, this procedendo action is moot.
{¶ 3} Accordingly, this court grants the respondent judge's motion for summary judgment and denies the application for a writ of procedendo. Costs assessed against 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).
*Page 1FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., A.J., and ANTHONY O. CALABRESE, JR., CONCUR
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.