State ex rel. Simms v. Sutula
State ex rel. Simms v. Sutula
81 Ohio St. 3d 110; 689 N.E.2d 564; 1998 Ohio LEXIS 71
State ex rel. Simms v. Sutula
Opinion of the Court
We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. The court of appeals correctly held that original’actions for extraordinary relief, e.g., a writ of procedendo, must be commenced by filing a complaint or petition rather than a motion. Civ.R. 3(A) (“A civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court * * *.”); Loc.App.R. 8(B)(1) of the Court of Appeals .for the Eighth Appellate District (“These original actions shall be instituted by the filing of a verified complaint * * *.”); cf. Myles v. Wyatt (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 191, 580 N.E.2d 1080, 1081, where we affirmed the dismissal of a motion for a writ of mandamus.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.