Case Title: State ex rel. Williams v. Bessey

Citation: 2010-Ohio-2113

Docket Number: 20092295

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2010-05-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Williams v. Bessey, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-2113.] 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2010-OHIO-2113 
THE STATE EX REL. WILLIAMS, APPELLANT, v. BESSEY, JUDGE, ET AL., 
APPELLEES. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Williams v. Bessey,  
Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-2113.] 
Appeal from dismissal of a petition for a writ of mandamus — Adequate remedy 
at law — Judgment affirmed. 
(No. 2009-2295 — Submitted May 12, 2010 — Decided May 19, 2010.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 08AP-158, 
2009-Ohio-5852. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 
mandamus action filed by appellant, Alan Williams.  In the absence of a patent 
and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction on the part of the judge to whom a case was 
allegedly transferred, Williams has an adequate remedy by appeal to challenge the 
transfer of the case to the judge.  See State ex rel. Carr v. McDonnell, 124 Ohio 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
St.3d 62, 2009-Ohio-6165, 918 N.E.2d 1004; State ex rel. Key v. Spicer (2001), 
91 Ohio St.3d 469, 746 N.E.2d 1119 (“a claim of improper assignment of a judge 
can generally be adequately raised by way of appeal”).  Williams did not allege 
sufficient facts to indicate any jurisdictional defect, much less a patent and 
unambiguous one.  We also deny Williams’s motion for oral argument. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
BROWN, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Alan Williams, pro se. 
 
Ron O’Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Paul Thies, 
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellees. 
______________________