Anderson v. Monroe Cty. Common Pleas Court ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Anderson v. Monroe Cty. Common Pleas Court, 
    2023-Ohio-1343
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
    SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    MONROE COUNTY
    BRIAN L. ANDERSON,
    Relator,
    v.
    MONROE COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT
    (JUDGE JULIE R. SELMON),
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
    Case No. 22 MO 0019
    Writ of Mandamus
    BEFORE:
    David A. D’Apolito, Cheryl L. Waite, Carol Ann Robb, Judges.
    JUDGMENT:
    Dismissed.
    Brian L. Anderson, Pro Se, #A796871, Noble Correctional Institution, 15708
    McConnelsville Road, Caldwell, Ohio 43724, Relator and
    Atty. James L. Peters, Monroe County Prosecuting Attorney, 101 North Main Street,
    Room 15, Woodsfield, Ohio 43793, for Respondent.
    Dated: April 25, 2023
    –2–
    PER CURIAM.
    {¶1}   Relator, Brian L. Anderson, brings this original action with a pro se petition
    for a writ of mandamus naming as Respondent, Monroe County Court of Common Pleas
    Judge Julie R. Selmon. Counsel for Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss on the
    basis that the petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Because
    the petition does not comply with the mandatory filing requirements of R.C. 2969.25, this
    court must dismiss this action.
    {¶2}   R.C. 2969.25 sets forth specific filing requirements for an inmate who files
    a civil action against a government employee or entity. In the present case, Respondent
    is a government employee and Relator, incarcerated in the Noble Correctional Institution,
    is a self-represented inmate. R.C. 2969.21(C) and (D). A case must be dismissed if the
    inmate fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of R.C. 2969.25 in the
    commencement of the action. State ex rel. Graham v. Findlay Mun. Court, 
    106 Ohio St.3d 63
    , 
    2005-Ohio-3671
    , 
    831 N.E.2d 435
    , ¶ 6 (“The requirements of R.C. 2969.25 are
    mandatory, and failure to comply with them subjects an inmate’s action to dismissal.”)
    Filing Fee Waiver
    {¶3}   In an affidavit included with his petition, Relator states he is without the
    necessary funds to pay the costs of this action and is requesting the filing fee and security
    deposit be waived. R.C. 2969.25(C) applies when an inmate seeks a waiver of the
    prepayment of the filing fees:
    (C) If an inmate who files a civil action or appeal against a government entity
    or employee seeks a waiver of the prepayment of the full filing fees
    assessed by the court in which the action or appeal is filed, the inmate shall
    file with the complaint or notice of appeal an affidavit that the inmate is
    seeking a waiver of the prepayment of the court’s full filing fees and an
    affidavit of indigency. The affidavit of waiver and the affidavit of indigency
    shall contain all of the following:
    Case No. 22 MO 0019
    –3–
    (1) A statement that sets forth the balance in the inmate account of the
    inmate for each of the preceding six months, as certified by the institutional
    cashier;
    (2) A statement that sets forth all other cash and things of value owned by
    the inmate at that time.
    {¶4}   As indicated, Relator’s petition includes an affidavit averring he is without
    sufficient financial means to prepay or give security for the costs of this action. However,
    the affidavit does not include a statement that sets forth the balance in his inmate account
    for each of the preceding six months, as certified by the institutional cashier. R.C.
    2969.25(C)(1). Nor does it include a statement that sets forth all other cash and things
    of value owned by Relator at the time he filed the petition. R.C. 2969.25(C)(2).
    {¶5}   In light of these procedural deficiencies and on the court’s own motion, IT
    IS HEREBY ORDERED that Relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus is hereby
    DISMISSED.        As a result, all remaining motions, including Respondent’s motion to
    dismiss, and unresolved filings are hereby dismissed as moot.
    {¶6}   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Civ.R. 58, that the Clerk of the
    Monroe County Court of Appeals shall immediately serve upon all parties (including
    unrepresented or self-represented parties) notice of this judgment and its date of entry
    upon the journal. Costs taxed to Relator.
    JUDGE DAVID A. D’APOLITO
    JUDGE CHERYL L. WAITE
    JUDGE CAROL ANN ROBB
    Case No. 22 MO 0019
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22 MO 0019

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/25/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/25/2023