State ex rel. Baker v. Schiemann - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,
1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice
Thomas J. Moyer.
Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's
Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.
Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative
Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.
Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.
NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the
full texts of the opinions after they have been released
electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised
to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West
Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.
The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume
and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound
volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

The State ex rel. Baker, Appellant, v. Schiemann, Appellee.
[Cite as State ex rel. Baker v. Schiemann (1993), Ohio
St.3d .]
Mandamus is not a substitute for appeal.
(No. 93-908 -- Submitted July 28, 1993 -- Decided
October 13, 1993.)
Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No.
65163.
Appellant, Saul P. Baker, M.D., is a pro se plaintiff in
an action pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga
County. He contracted with appellee, attorney Jeffrey J.
Schiemann, to represent all plaintiffs in the case except
himself. Appellant contends that he turned over to appellee
"thousands of pages" of documents appellant had prepared for
use in the case. Subsequently, appellee filed a motion to
withdraw as counsel for all plaintiffs, which appellant opposed
because his documents had not been returned. On January 11,
1993, the trial court granted appellee's motion to withdraw as
counsel. On February 1, 1993, the court ordered appellee to
produce copies of the complete file in the case to appellant,
at appellant's costs.
Appellant thereupon filed the instant complaint in
mandamus in the court of appeals to compel appellee to return
all of appellant's documents. The court of appeals dismissed
the complaint sua sponte, finding that appellant had an
adequate remedy via appeal from the trial court's February 1993
order.
The cause is before this court upon an appeal as of right.

Saul P. Baker, M.D., pro se.
Jeffrey J. Schiemann, pro se.

Per Curiam. We affirm the judgment of the court of
appeals. The trial court has ordered the relief appellant
seeks. If he is dissatisfied, he may appeal. Mandamus is not
a substitute for appeal. State ex rel. Pressley v. Indus.
Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St.2d 141, 40 O.O. 2d 141, 228 N.E.2d
631, paragraph three of the syllabus.