From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex Rel. Ahmed v. Costine

Supreme Court of Ohio
Sep 22, 2004
2004 Ohio 4756 (Ohio 2004)

Opinion

No. 2004-0651.

Submitted August 17, 2004.

Decided September 22, 2004.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Belmont County, No. 01-BA-30, 2004-Ohio-1369.

Nawaz Ahmed, pro se.

Frank Pierce, Belmont County Prosecuting Attorney, and Robert W. Quirk, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee Judge Costine.


{¶ 1} In June 2001, appellant, Nawaz Ahmed, an inmate at Mansfield Correctional Institution, filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals for Belmont County against appellees, Belmont County Probate Judge J. Mark Costine, Probate Court Chief Deputy Clerk Jayme Strauss, Deputy Clerk Shirley Jenewein, and Edward Sustersic, an attorney who had been appointed conservator of Ahmed's estate. In his lengthy complaint, Ahmed requested a writ of mandamus ordering appellees to include various documents in the case record for appeal and writs of mandamus and prohibition to remedy various alleged errors in the probate-court proceedings. Ahmed further requested a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.

{¶ 2} On June 16, 2003, in a separate case, the court of appeals affirmed the probate court's orders denying Ahmed's request to terminate the conservatorship. In re Conservatorship of Ahmed, Belmont App. Nos. 01-BA-13 and 01-BA-48, 2003-Ohio-3272, 2003 WL 21442314.

{¶ 3} On March 15, 2004, the court of appeals dismissed Ahmed's complaint for writs of mandamus and prohibition.

{¶ 4} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals because "`[n]either prohibition nor mandamus will issue if appellant ha[s] an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.'" State ex rel. Denton v. Bedinghaus, 98 Ohio St.3d 298, 2003-Ohio-861, 784 N.E.2d 99, ¶ 27, quoting State ex rel. Hummel v. Sadler, 96 Ohio St.3d 84, 2002-Ohio-3605, 771 N.E.2d 853, ¶ 21.

{¶ 5} Ahmed had an adequate legal remedy by App.R. 9 to correct any material omissions from the probate court record. State ex rel. Atkins v. Hoover, 97 Ohio St.3d 76, 2002-Ohio-5313, 776 N.E.2d 99, ¶ 5. Ahmed also had adequate remedies by delayed appeal and motion for relief from judgment to raise his claim that he did not receive sufficient notice of a judgment he sought to appeal. State ex rel. Gadsden v. Lioi (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 574, 575, 757 N.E.2d 355. Finally, Ahmed had an adequate remedy by appeal of the various probatecourt orders he challenges in his complaint.

{¶ 6} Therefore, the court of appeals properly dismissed Ahmed's complaint.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Stratton, O'Connor and O'Donnell, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State ex Rel. Ahmed v. Costine

Supreme Court of Ohio
Sep 22, 2004
2004 Ohio 4756 (Ohio 2004)
Case details for

State ex Rel. Ahmed v. Costine

Case Details

Full title:The State ex rel. Ahmed, Appellant, v. Costine, Judge, et al., Appellees

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Sep 22, 2004

Citations

2004 Ohio 4756 (Ohio 2004)
2004 Ohio 4756
814 N.E.2d 865

Citing Cases

State ex Rel. Halder v. Fuerst

{¶ 7} Finally, even if the clerk had not properly served notice of the judgment on Halder, he is not entitled…

State ex Rel. Downs v. Panioto

{¶ 27} Second, prohibition will not issue if the relator has an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of…