Krooss v. Murray
Krooss v. Murray
Opinion
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Paul Krooss, for a writ of prohibition to prevent appellee, Xenia Municipal Court Judge Michael Murray, from proceeding in a case involving Krooss. Contrary to appellant’s assertions, Judge Murray does not patently and unambiguously lack jurisdiction over the underlying case, because the case has a territorial connection to the municipal court. See Cheap Escape Co., Inc. v. Haddox, L.L.C., 120 Ohio St.3d 493, 2008-Ohio-6323, 900 N.E.2d 601, syllabus. Absent a patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction, Krooss has an adequate remedy by appeal to raise his jurisdictional claim. State ex rel. Plant v. Cosgrove, 119 Ohio St.3d 264, 2008-Ohio-3838, 893 N.E.2d 485, ¶ 5.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Krooss, Appellant, v. Murray, Judge, Appellee
- Status
- Published