In re Disqualification of McDonald - 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

IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF MCDONALD.
TOLEDO FAIR HOUSING CENTER ET AL. v. NATIONWIDE
MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL.
[Cite as In re Disqualification of McDonald (1997), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.]
Judges -- Affidavit of disqualification -- Underlying case is a class action in
which the judge and his spouse may be class members -- Case returned to
administrative judge for reassignment to another judge who will rule on the
limited issue of the judge and his spouse's membership in the class -- If
judge and his spouse are not class members, case will be returned to Judge
McDonald.
(No. 97-AP-152 -- Decided November 14, 1997.)
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Lucas County
Court of Common Pleas case No. 93-1685.

MOYER, C.J. Jeffrey S. Goldman, counsel for the defendants, Nationwide
Mutual Insurance Company and Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company, has
filed an affidavit seeking the disqualification of Judge Frederick H. McDonald
from the above-captioned class action lawsuit. The plaintiffs allege violations of
the Ohio Civil Rights Act arising from the sale of homeowners' insurance by the
defendants.

Affiant contends that Judge McDonald should be disqualified from further
proceedings in this action because the judge and judge's wife are members of the
plaintiff class. This contention is disputed by the plaintiffs; however, Judge
McDonald states that there are "good faith arguments" in support of each party's
position and believes that the issue of his membership in the plaintiff class should
be referred to another judge for decision. If he is determined to be a member of
the plaintiff class, Judge McDonald indicates that he will recuse himself. If he is

not included as a member of the plaintiff class, Judge McDonald says he knows of
no reason to recuse himself.

I accept Judge McDonald's response as an indication that he is recusing
himself from the portion of the underlying case that involves a determination of
whether he and his wife are members of the plaintiff class. Accordingly, the
affidavit of disqualification, as it relates to that issue, is moot. The case is
returned to the administrative judge of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas,
General Division, for reassignment to another judge who will rule on the limited
issue of the membership of Judge McDonald and his wife in the plaintiff class.

If Judge McDonald and his wife are determined to be members of the
plaintiff class, Judge McDonald indicates that he will recuse himself. In that
instance, the case may proceed before the judge to whom the case was reassigned
or may be assigned to another judge by the administrative judge of the division. If
Judge McDonald and his wife are determined not to be members of the plaintiff
class, the case shall be returned to Judge McDonald for further proceedings.