DocketNumber: No. 90930.
Citation Numbers: 2008 Ohio 1713
Judges: FRANK D. CELEBREZZE., JR., J.
Filed Date: 4/9/2008
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
{¶ 2} Initially, we find that Alexander's complaint for a writ of mandamus is defective since it is improperly captioned. A complaint for a writ of mandamus must be brought in the name of the state, on relation of the person applying. The failure of Alexander to properly caption his complaint for a writ of mandamus warrants dismissal. R.C.
{¶ 3} Alexander has also failed to comply with R.C.
{¶ 4} Finally, Alexander has failed to comply Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a), which mandates that the complaint for a writ of mandamus be supported by a sworn affidavit that specifies the details of his claim. The failure of Alexander to comply with the supporting affidavit requirement of Loc.App.R. 45(B)(1)(a) requires the dismissal of his complaint for a writ of mandamus. State ex rel. Smith v. McMonagle (July 17, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70899; State ex rel. Wilson v. Calabrese (Jan. 18, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. 70077.
{¶ 5} Accordingly, we dismiss Alexander's complaint for a writ of mandamus based upon the aforesaid procedural defects. This dismissal is entered without addressing the merits of Alexander's complaint for a writ of mandamus. Costs to Alexander. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth District Court of Appeals serve notice of this judgment upon all parties as required by Civ.R. 58(B). Complaint dismissed.
*Page 1JAMES J. SWEENEY, A.J., and SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR