State ex rel. Nyamusevya v. Hawkins, 2020 Ohio 2690

CitiMortgage (successor by merger/assignment to ABN/AMRO/Capitol) filed a foreclosure against relator Leonard Nyamusevya in Franklin C.P. No. 10CVE-09-13480 (complaint filed 2010).
The trial court granted summary judgment to CitiMortgage (July 10, 2013) and entered final judgment of foreclosure (May 20, 2014); relator appealed.
This court (10th Dist.) in a prior appeal affirmed CitiMortgage's standing to foreclose but reversed in part on the amount owed (CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Nyamusevya, 2016 decision). Proceedings resumed, and after further litigation a directed verdict/judgment for CitiMortgage was entered following a November 2018 trial; relator appealed (case 18AP-949, pending).
Relator filed this original action (April 2019) seeking: (1) mandamus to compel the trial judge to rule on certain motions he asserted remained undecided, and (2) prohibition asserting the trial court lacked jurisdiction because CitiMortgage lacked standing.
The magistrate dismissed the complaint under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) (failure to state a claim), finding mandamus/prohibition unavailable because the trial court had entered final judgment (motions were implicitly overruled) and prior appellate rulings addressed jurisdiction/standing; the Tenth District adopted the magistrate's decision and granted respondent's motion to dismiss (objections overruled).

Issue	Nyamusevya's Argument	Hawkins'/CitiMortgage's Argument	Held
Mandamus to compel rulings on pending pre-judgment motions	Trial court refused/unduly delayed ruling; judge must be compelled to decide	Final judgment was entered, which implicitly disposed of pending motions; relator has appellate remedy	Denied — mandamus inappropriate; motions implicitly overruled by final judgment and appeal is adequate remedy (moot)
Prohibition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction/standing	CitiMortgage lacked valid documentation/standing; trial court therefore lacked jurisdiction	Prior appellate decision already found CitiMortgage had standing; law of the case applies	Denied — prohibition unavailable; subject-matter jurisdiction previously addressed by appellate court (law of the case)
Effect of relator's bankruptcy suggestion of stay	Bankruptcy filing/suggestions of bankruptcy should stay these proceedings	Bankruptcy discharge terminated the automatic stay; no automatic appellate stay was in place	Court reactivated the original action after bankruptcy discharge; stay did not bar proceeding
Sufficiency of complaint under Civ.R. 12(B)(6)	Complaint alleges grounds for extraordinary relief	Complaint fails to show clear right, duty, and absence of adequate remedy; prior rulings and appeal provide remedies	Complaint fails to state a claim; motion to dismiss granted

State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagle, 6 Ohio St.3d 28 (1983) (elements for mandamus: clear right, duty, and no adequate remedy)
State ex rel. Elder v. Camplese, 144 Ohio St.3d 89 (2015) (writs require absence of adequate remedy in ordinary course of law)
State ex rel. Boggs v. Springfield Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 72 Ohio St.3d 94 (1995) (12(B)(6) tests facial sufficiency of petition in mandamus/prohibition)
O'Brien v. Univ. Community Tenants Union, Inc., 42 Ohio St.2d 242 (1975) (complaint dismissal standard — no set of facts entitling plaintiff to relief)
State ex rel. Reynolds v. Basinger, 99 Ohio St.3d 303 (2003) (mandamus may lie to compel judicial action where court refuses or unduly delays rendering judgment)
Maust v. Palmer, 94 Ohio App.3d 764 (10th Dist. 1994) (final judgment implicitly overrules unaddressed pre-judgment motions)
State ex rel. Eaton Corp. v. Lancaster, 40 Ohio St.3d 404 (1988) (prohibition tests subject-matter jurisdiction only)
State ex rel. Dannaher v. Crawford, 78 Ohio St.3d 391 (1997) (writs enforce, not override, superior court mandates)
State ex rel. Womack v. Marsh, 128 Ohio St.3d 303 (2011) (courts may take judicial notice of related pleadings/orders when not subject to reasonable dispute)
State ex rel. Fitzgerald v. Ohio Republican Party, 145 Ohio St.3d 92 (2015) (procedures for judicial notice in original actions)