THE STATE EX REL. PORTER, APPELLANT, v. CLEVELAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY ET AL., APPELLEES.
No. 98-1140
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
December 30, 1998
84 Ohio St.3d 258 | 1998-Ohio-539
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 74269.
(No. 98-1140—Submitted October 27, 1998—Decided December 30, 1998.)
{¶ 1} In 1998, appellant, Paul Porter, filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus in the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County. Porter, an inmate at the Marion Correctional Institution, sought to compel appellees, Cleveland Department of Public Safety and its police chief, to forward copies of certain records to him pursuant to Ohio‘s Public Records Law,
{¶ 2} The court of appeals dismissed Porter‘s complaint, and the cause is before this court upon an appeal as of right.
Paul Porter, pro se.
Sylvester Summers, Jr., Cleveland Director of Law, Joseph J. Jerse, Chief Assistant Director of Law, and Anthony N. Palombo, Assistant Director of Law, for respondents.
{¶ 3} Porter asserts in his propositions of law that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his complaint for a writ of mandamus. For the reasons that follow, Porter‘s claims lack merit.
{¶ 4} First, as the court of appeals correctly held, appellees did not have a clear legal duty under
{¶ 5} Second, Porter waived his appellate claims concerning appellees’ alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and his constitutional right of access because he failed to raise these claims in the court of appeals. ” ‘Ordinarily, reviewing courts do not consider questions not presented to the court whose judgment is sought to be reversed.’ ” See State ex rel. Quarto Mining Co. v. Foreman (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 78, 81, 679 N.E.2d 706, 709, quoting Goldberg v. Indus. Comm. (1936), 131 Ohio St. 399, 404, 6 O.O. 108, 110, 3 N.E.2d 364, 367.
{¶ 6} Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.