State ex rel. Greene Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. O'Diam (Slip Opinion), 129 N.E.3d 393

Background

Courtroom 3 in Greene County Courthouse was under control of the General Division of the Greene County Court of Common Pleas; Probate Judge Thomas O’Diam sought to have the board designate it as the Probate Court’s courtroom with exclusive use three days a week.
On March 5, 2018, Judge O’Diam ordered the board to designate Courtroom 3 for the probate division and to pay his legal fees related to enforcing that order; the general-division judges entered a conflicting order asserting exclusive management of the lower courthouse area.
The board responded by passing a resolution to create separate probate space in the Juvenile Justice Center; Judge O’Diam then declared that resolution void and enjoined the board from implementing it.
The board and Greene County filed this original action for a writ of prohibition to prevent Judge O’Diam from enforcing his March 5 and March 13 orders; Judge O’Diam moved to dismiss.
The Supreme Court of Ohio granted leave for the Ohio Association of Probate Judges to file amicus, denied intervention by the general-division judges, held that a judge lacks inherent authority to take courthouse space already controlled by another court or division, and granted a peremptory writ prohibiting enforcement of the orders designating Courtroom 3 to the probate division (but reserved the fee-payment issue for a related mandamus case).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a probate judge has inherent authority to order the county to designate courtroom space already controlled by another court/division to the probate court	Relators: Judge O’Diam exceeded jurisdiction; courts may not be ordered to yield space already controlled by another court	O’Diam: Courts have inherent authority to secure necessary courtroom space and can order county to designate space for their use	Held: A judge lacks inherent authority to take control of courthouse space that is already under another court/division’s control; prohibition granted as to designation orders
Whether relators stated a claim for prohibition (motion to dismiss)	Relators: Complaint alleges patent lack of jurisdiction warranting prohibition	O’Diam: Inherent powers recognized by precedent allow such orders; dismissal urged	Held: Motion to dismiss denied; relators entitled to writ because O’Diam lacked jurisdiction re: courtroom designation
Whether the general-division judges may intervene as relators	General-division judges: have an interest in maintaining control and should intervene	Relators/board: Board adequately represents their interests; allowing intervention would delay adjudication	Held: Intervention denied (no right; permissive denied as it would delay resolution)
Whether the requirement that the county pay O’Diam’s legal fees is subject to prohibition now	Relators: Did not specifically contest fee-demand in prohibition	O’Diam: Funding orders presumptively valid under inherent authority	Held: Writ does not bar enforcement of fee-payment portion; that issue reserved for related mandamus proceeding

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Wilke v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 90 Ohio St.3d 55 (2000) (recognizes courts’ inherent authority to order reasonable funding necessary to court administration)
State ex rel. Johnston v. Taulbee, 66 Ohio St.2d 417 (1981) (separation-of-powers considerations in evaluating court funding/appropriation disputes)
Bittikofer v. Babst, 97 Ohio St. 64 (1917) (court may take control of courthouse space from county administrative officer to protect judicial function)
Zangerle v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 141 Ohio St. 70 (1943) (courts may exercise control over courthouse facilities essential to performance of judicial functions)
Finley v. Pfeiffer, 163 Ohio St. 149 (1955) (probate court is a court of general jurisdiction and courts’ inherent power to acquire necessary — not merely desirable — space)
State ex rel. State v. Lewis, 99 Ohio St.3d 97 (2003) (patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction can render alternative remedies unnecessary)