State ex rel. Thompson v. Gonzalez, 2024 Ohio 897

Goldy Thompson, currently incarcerated, was convicted of felonious assault in 2019 by a jury in Lucas County, Ohio; his conviction was affirmed on appeal.
Thompson filed a complaint for writs of prohibition and mandamus against Judges Olender and Jennings (Lucas County Common Pleas Court), the court's administrative judge, and former Judge Gonzalez.
He alleged that Judge Jennings improperly issued an order in his case without proper assignment, and that Judge Olender was not properly assigned to preside over his subsequent motion.
Thompson sought (1) to vacate Judge Jennings’s order, (2) to prevent Judge Olender from deciding his pending motion, and (3) to compel the administrative judge to assign a judge properly.
The Sixth District Court of Appeals dismissed his complaint sua sponte, finding it was obviously meritless.
Thompson appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which reviewed whether summary dismissal was appropriate.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Judge Jennings have authority to sign the August 29, 2019 order?	Jennings was not properly assigned, so her order was unauthorized.	Order was signed by Jennings on behalf of Judge Gonzalez, who was assigned.	Not error—Judge had authority, and any error was voidable, not void.
Can a writ of prohibition be used to vacate Judge Jennings’ order?	Writ required due to lack of proper assignment.	Remedy was by direct appeal, as subject-matter jurisdiction existed.	No writ—remedy was appeal, not extraordinary relief.
Did Judge Olender lack authority to preside over Thompson’s motion?	Olender had not been formally assigned to the case.	Local rule authorized successor judges to take over pending cases.	Olender had authority under local rule—no writ warranted.
Was the complaint properly dismissed sua sponte as obviously meritless?	Not sufficiently supported; should have received notice.	Allegations were facially meritless; claims failed even if presumed true.	Dismissal affirmed—the claims were obviously meritless.

State ex rel. Kerr v. Pollex, 159 Ohio St.3d 317 (standard for sua sponte dismissal—only if clearly frivolous or without merit)
State ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114 (distinguishing void from voidable judgments and adequacy of remedy by appeal)
State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St.3d 55 (requirements for mandamus relief)
State ex rel. Nyamusevya v. Hawkins, 165 Ohio St.3d 22 (requirements for prohibition relief)
In re J.J., 111 Ohio St.3d 205 (improper reassignment or referral produces voidable, not void, orders)