State ex rel. Schwarzmer v. Mazzone
2025 Ohio 1246
Ohio2025Background
- Midland Funding filed a debt collection suit against Schwarzmer in Cleveland Municipal Court.
- Schwarzmer responded with a class-action counterclaim, challenging the municipal court’s jurisdiction and seeking declaratory judgment and damages.
- The municipal court dismissed Midland’s claim and transferred Schwarzmer’s counterclaim to the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court.
- Schwarzmer sought to have the common pleas court reject the transfer and return the case to municipal court, arguing lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
- After the common pleas court declined to return the case, Schwarzmer sought writs of prohibition and mandamus from the Eighth District Court of Appeals, which granted them, finding the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction.
- Midland appealed to the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the common pleas court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction after transfer | Only the municipal court can void its own judgments | Common pleas has general jurisdiction for declaratory actions | Common pleas court did not lack subject-matter jurisdiction |
| Whether prohibition/mandamus relief is appropriate | No adequate remedy in ordinary course of law | Appeal is available after judgment | Adequate remedy exists via appeal; writs denied |
| Interpretation of Lingo precedent on jurisdiction | Lingo: Only issuing court can void judgments | Lingo: Common pleas can initially consider jurisdiction | Lingo supports general jurisdiction, not absence thereof |
| Effect of concurrent jurisdiction of lower courts | Municipal court's power limits common pleas' power | Statute doesn't grant exclusive jurisdiction here | Concurrent jurisdiction not a bar to common pleas’ authority |
Key Cases Cited
- Pratts v. Hurley, 102 Ohio St.3d 81 (court can have jurisdiction but err in how it exercises it)
- Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kuchta, 141 Ohio St.3d 75 (subject-matter jurisdiction is general; errors are appealable, not jurisdictional)
- Lingo v. State, 138 Ohio St.3d 427 (common pleas court may consider jurisdiction but may err on merits)
- Cheap Escape Co., Inc. v. Haddox, L.L.C., 120 Ohio St.3d 493 (municipal court’s limited territorial jurisdiction)
- Saxton v. Seiberling, 48 Ohio St. 554 (common pleas court is of general jurisdiction)