Patel v. Crawford
Patel v. Crawford
Opinion
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellants, Arvind and Bharati Patel, for a writ of mandamus. The Patels sought the writ to compel appellee, Judge Dale A. Crawford, sitting by assignment in Longwell v. Patel, Belmont C.P. No. 03-CY-036, to hear appellant Arvind Patel’s motion for sanctions “prior to presiding over the trial” in the case. 1 Appellants could not establish either a clear legal right to the requested extraordinary relief or a corresponding clear legal duty on the part of Judge Crawford to provide it because the case was dismissed before any trial could occur.
Judgment affirmed.
. The court of appeals also dismissed appellants’ claims for a continuance, to give them time to retain counsel and to appoint a translator to aid appellant Bharati Patel at trial, but appellants do not claim any error in the court’s holding on these claims in this appeal.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.