Case Title: In re Disqualification of OFarrell

Citation: 2001-Ohio-4098

Docket Number: 2001AP019

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2001-03-12T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as In re Disqualification of O’Farrell, 94 Ohio St.3d 1226, 2001-Ohio-4098.] 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF O’FARRELL. 
MCCARTY ET AL. v. ASHCRAFT ET AL. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of O’Farrell (2001), 94 Ohio St.3d 1226.] 
Judges — Affidavit of disqualification — Judge who participated in ex parte 
communication is not disqualified when conversation was initiated by 
defense counsel and addressed only procedural matters related to an 
upcoming hearing — No bias or prejudice shown. 
(No. 01-AP-019 — Decided March 12, 2001.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Tuscarawas County Court of Common 
Pleas case No. 2001CV010031. 
__________________ 
 
MOYER, C.J.  This affidavit of disqualification filed by John and Robert 
McCarty seeks the disqualification of Judge Edward O’Farrell from further 
proceedings regarding the above-captioned case, Rob McCarty et al. v. Mark 
Ashcraft et al. 
 
Affiants claim that Judge O’Farrell should be disqualified from the 
underlying case because he engaged in an ex parte conversation on November 22, 
2000, with defense counsel.  They further assert that this conversation addressed 
substantive matters in the underlying case and resulted in the judge’s December 5, 
2000 decision in which affiants’ motion for summary judgment was overruled. 
 
Where a party seeks the disqualification of a judge based on allegations 
that the judge engaged in an ex parte communication, the question is whether the 
alleged communication demonstrates a bias and prejudice on the part of the judge.  
To satisfy this test, the communications must have been initiated by the judge or 
address substantive matters in the case.  See In re Disqualification of Aurelius 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
(1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 1254, 674 N.E.2d 362.  Moreover, the allegations must be 
substantiated and consist of something more than hearsay or speculation.  In re 
Disqualification of Cacioppo (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 1245, 674 N.E.2d 356. 
 
Here, affiants fail to provide evidence to support their inference that the 
alleged ex parte communication addressed substantive matters or resulted in the 
adverse ruling on the motion for summary judgment.  To the contrary, the 
response of Judge O’Farrell and affidavit submitted by opposing counsel indicate 
that the conversation was initiated by defense counsel and addressed only 
procedural matters related to an upcoming hearing.  The record before me is not 
sufficient to support a determination that the alleged ex parte communication 
demonstrates a bias or prejudice on the part of Judge O’Farrell that mandates his 
disqualification from the underlying matter. 
 
For these reasons, the affidavit of disqualification is found not well taken 
and is denied.  The case shall proceed before Judge O’Farrell. 
__________________