Case Title: In re Disqualification of Swenski

Citation: 2021-Ohio-113

Docket Number: 21-AP-002

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2021-01-11T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Swenski, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2021-Ohio-113.] 
 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF SWENSKI. 
ALLEN v. ADDI. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Swenski, ___ Ohio St.3d ___,  
2021-Ohio-113.] 
Judges—Affidavits 
of 
disqualification—R.C. 
2701.03—Affiant 
failed 
to 
demonstrate bias or prejudice by judge—Disqualification denied. 
(No. 21-AP-002—Decided January 11, 2021.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Lorain County Court of Common Pleas, 
Domestic Relations and Juvenile Division, Case No. 18DR084392. 
____________ 
O’CONNOR, C.J. 
{¶ 1} Plaintiff Benjamin P. Allen has filed an affidavit pursuant to R.C. 
2701.03 and the Ohio Constitution, Article IV, Section 5(C), seeking to disqualify 
Judge Lisa I. Swenski from the above-referenced divorce case.  Mr. Allen has filed 
three previous affidavits of disqualification against Judge Swenski—all of which 
were denied.  See Supreme Court case Nos. 20-AP-043, 20-AP-065, and 20-AP-
074. 
{¶ 2} Mr. Allen alleges that Judge Swenski should be removed because she 
destroyed exhibits in the underlying case.  Mr. Allen raised the same allegation in 
his first affidavit of disqualification.  After considering Judge Swenski’s response 
to the affidavit, the allegation was rejected.  See In re Disqualification of Swenski, 
___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2020-Ohio-4614, ___ N.E.3d ___.  Mr. Allen raised the 
allegation again in his third affidavit of disqualification.  It was explained to him 
that because the chief justice had already considered the allegation, it would not be 
addressed again.  Mr. Allen was also cautioned that the filing of repeated and 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
unsubstantiated affidavits is contrary to the purpose of R.C. 2701.03 and a waste of 
judicial resources.  See Supreme Court case No. 20-AP-074. 
{¶ 3} In his present affidavit, Mr. Allen submitted an exhibit that he appears 
to believe substantiates his allegation that Judge Swenski destroyed evidence.  The 
exhibit, however, is not proof that Judge Swenski tampered with evidence or that 
she should be disqualified. 
{¶ 4} The affidavit of disqualification is therefore denied. 
{¶ 5} “The statutory right to seek disqualification of a judge is an 
extraordinary remedy not to be used in a frivolous manner.  Indeed, the filing of 
frivolous, unsubstantiated, or repeated affidavits of disqualification is contrary to 
the purpose of R.C. 2701.03 and a waste of judicial resources.”  In re 
Disqualification of Browne, 136 Ohio St.3d 1279, 2013-Ohio-4468, 996 N.E.2d 
944, ¶ 8; see also In re Disqualification of Stucki, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2020-Ohio-
5326, ___ N.E.3d ___ (sanctioning a litigant after he ignored an admonition 
warning him against filing frivolous affidavits of disqualification).  Mr. Allen has 
now filed four meritless affidavits of disqualification in less than seven months.  
Three of those affidavits involved the same unsubstantiated allegation.  
Accordingly, it is sua sponte ordered that Mr. Allen is prohibited from filing any 
further affidavits of disqualification relating to Allen v. Addi, Lorain C.P. No. 
18DR084392, without first obtaining leave.  Any request for leave shall be 
submitted to the clerk of this court for the chief justice’s review. 
_________________