State ex rel. Black v. Forchione (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4336

Relator Lawrence Black was previously convicted of a sexually oriented offense and is subject to R.C. 2950.05(A) address-notification requirements.
He was later indicted for failing to notify the sheriff of a change of residential address.
Black filed a mandamus petition in the court of appeals seeking to compel Judge Frank G. Forchione to vacate rulings, arguing Forchione lacked jurisdiction and that only Judge Haas (who presided over the original case) had jurisdiction.
The court of appeals granted Judge Forchione’s motion to dismiss Black’s mandamus petition.
Black appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court challenging that dismissal and asserting lack of jurisdiction of the currently assigned judge.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether mandamus is appropriate to challenge the judge assigned to Black’s indictment	Black: Judge Forchione lacks jurisdiction; only Judge Haas may preside	Forchione: Assignment challenge is not a proper basis for mandamus; appeal is adequate remedy	Mandamus denied—assignment disputes are generally raised on appeal, not by mandamus
Whether Black has an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law	Black: Mandamus necessary to vacate Forchione’s rulings now	Respondent: Black can raise the assignment issue on appeal from conviction or rulings	Court: Black has an adequate remedy by appeal; mandamus unavailable

State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St.3d 55 (2012) (elements required for mandamus)
State ex rel. Key v. Spicer, 91 Ohio St.3d 469 (2001) (assignment disputes normally resolved on appeal)
State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagle, 6 Ohio St.3d 28 (1983) (mandamus/prohibition not a substitute for appeal)