State Ex Rel. Bell v. Madison County Board of Commissioners

128 Ohio St. 3d 357

Ohio

2011

Check Treatment

THE STATE EX REL. BELL, APPELLANT, v. MADISON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ET AL., APPELLEES.

No. 2010-1525

Supreme Court of Ohio

Submitted February 2, 2011—Decided February 9, 2011.

[Cite as State ex rel. Bell v. Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 128 Ohio St.3d 357, 2011-Ohio-527.]

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Greg A. Bell, for a writ of mandamus ordering appellee Madison County Board of Commissioners to comply with R.C. 163.01 and 163.02 to provide him with due process in the taking of his real property rights and to comply with a consent agreement.

{¶ 2} “Mandamus will not issue if there is a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.”

State ex rel. McClaran v. Ontario, 119 Ohio St.3d 105, 2008-Ohio-3867, 892 N.E.2d 440, ¶ 15; R.C. 2731.05. Bell had adequate remedies at law by way of the civil actions and appeals he has already pursued. See, e.g., , affirmed in , appeal not accepted, ; , affirmed in .

{¶ 3} Moreover, the mere fact that Bell has already unsuccessfully invoked some of these alternate remedies does not thereby entitle him to the requested extraordinary relief in mandamus. See

State ex rel. Agosto v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 119 Ohio St.3d 366, 2008-Ohio-4607, 894 N.E.2d 314, ¶ 12; .

Judgment affirmed.

O‘CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O‘DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur.

Phillip Wayne Cramer, for appellant.

Onda, LaBuhn, Rankin & Boggs Co., L.P.A., and Timothy S. Rankin, for appellee Madison County Board of Commissioners.

GOINS, APPELLANT, v. PINEDA, WARDEN, APPELLEE.

No. 2010-1736

Supreme Court of Ohio

Submitted February 2, 2011—Decided February 9, 2011.

[Cite as Goins v. Pineda, 128 Ohio St.3d 358, 2011-Ohio-529.]

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the motion of appellant, Dana Goins, for leave to file a second petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Res judicata bars Goins from filing a successive habeas corpus petition to raise claims that he raised or could have raised in his previous petition. See

State ex rel. Johnson v. Pineda, 126 Ohio St.3d 480, 2010-Ohio-4387, 935 N.E.2d 38, ¶ 1.¹

Judgment affirmed.

O‘CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O‘DONNELL, LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur.

Dana Goins, pro se.

Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and M. Scott Criss, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Notes

1. We deny appellant‘s motion for oral argument.