State ex rel. Forsyth v. Brigner - 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

[Cite as State ex rel. Forsyth v. Brigner, 86 Ohio St.3d 299, 1999-Ohio-105.]

THE STATE EX REL. FORSYTH, APPELLANT, v. BRIGNER, JUDGE, APPELLEE.
[Cite as State ex rel. Forsyth v. Brigner (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 299.]
Mandamus to compel common pleas court judge to rule on a pretrial motion filed
prior to the issuance of a divorce decree -- Complaint dismissed, when.
(No. 99-598 -- Submitted June 22, 1999 -- Decided September 1, 1999.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No. CA 17547.

In December 1992, appellant, M. Wayne Forsyth, filed a motion in the
Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, to
have depositions of himself and his wife filed in his divorce case. Subsequently,
the common pleas court issued a divorce decree. See, e.g., Forsyth v. Forsyth
(June 14, 1996), Montgomery App. No. 15487, unreported, 1996 WL 325507.

In December 1998, Forsyth filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals for
Montgomery County for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, Judge V.
Michael Brigner, to rule on his December 1992 motion, which he contended had
never been adjudicated. Judge Brigner filed a motion to dismiss Forsyth's
complaint. The court of appeals dismissed the complaint.

This cause is now before the court upon an appeal as of right.
__________________

M. Wayne Forsyth, pro se.

Mathias H. Heck, Jr., Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and John
F. Krumholtz, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
__________________

Per Curiam. Forsyth asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his
mandamus action. For the reasons that follow, Forsyth's claims are meritless.

Although mandamus and procedendo will issue in cases of a court's undue
delay in entering judgment, State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 33,

35, 656 N.E.2d 332, 333, it is evident here that even assuming no express ruling on
the pretrial motion, the trial court overruled Forsyth's motion to have depositions
filed when it entered its divorce decree. See State ex rel. The V Cos. v. Marshall
(1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 467, 469, 692 N.E.2d 198, 201 ("[W]hen a trial court fails to
rule on a pretrial motion [and proceeds to judgment in the case], it may ordinarily
be presumed that the court overruled it"). Forsyth is not entitled to a writ of
mandamus to compel Judge Brigner to do an act that has already been performed.
State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 405, 406, 696 N.E.2d 581,
582.

In addition, to the extent that Forsyth challenged Judge Brigner's ruling on
the pretrial motion, he had an adequate legal remedy by raising this challenge in
his appeal from the divorce decree. Forsyth v. Forsyth (June 14, 1996),
Montgomery App. No. 15487, unreported, 1996 WL 325507. A plain and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law precludes extraordinary relief in
mandamus. State ex rel. Natl. Electrical Contrs. Assn. v. Ohio Bur. of Emp. Serv.
(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 179, 183, 699 N.E.2d 64, 67.

Finally, Forsyth erroneously submits evidence that is not part of the court of
appeals' record to support his contentions. We cannot add matter to the record
before us and decide this appeal based upon that new matter. State ex rel. Cotton
v. Ghee (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 54, 55-56, 701 N.E.2d 989, 990.

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.

2