Case Title: State ex rel. Moir v. Kovack

Citation: 2016-Ohio-158

Docket Number: 2014-1951

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2016-01-20T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State 
ex rel. Moir v. Kovack, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-158.] 
 
 
 
 
 
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. 2016-OHIO-158 
THE STATE EX REL. MOIR v. KOVACK, JUDGE, ET AL. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Moir v. Kovack, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-158.] 
Prohibition―Effect of recusal of administrative judge―Administrative judge has 
no jurisdiction to appoint magistrate in case from which judge has recused 
herself―Judge appointed to hear case has authority to appoint magistrates 
under Civ.R. 53(A)―Writ granted in part. 
(No. 2014-1951—Submitted April 14, 2015—Decided January 20, 2016.) 
IN PROHIBITION. 
_____________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} This case is an action for a writ of prohibition regarding an underlying 
divorce case in the Medina County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations 
Division.  The judge assigned to the case, respondent Mary R. Kovack, recused 
herself, and the chief justice of this court assigned a visiting judge.  Thereafter, 
acting in her capacity as the administrative judge of that court, Judge Kovack issued 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
orders assigning magistrates to the visiting judge for the purpose of presiding over 
the divorce at issue. 
{¶ 2} Relator, Gabriella Moir, brought this action against Judge Kovack and 
Judge Carol J. Dezso of the Summit County Domestic Relations Court, the assigned 
visiting judge, as well as the two courts and one of the assigned magistrates.  She 
asserts that Judge Kovack and Judge Dezso lack jurisdiction to assign magistrates 
and requests a writ of prohibition ordering them to cease assigning or referring 
anyone to hear the case except Judge Dezso herself. 
{¶ 3} We grant a peremptory writ as to Judge Kovack only.  Judge Kovack 
recused herself based on a potential conflict of interest.  She is therefore without 
jurisdiction to assign magistrates in the case, even in her role as administrative 
judge of the court. However, Judge Dezso as the appointed judge may assign 
magistrates to help her hear the case, and therefore we deny the writ as to her. 
Facts 
{¶ 4} Gabriella Moir is the plaintiff in the underlying divorce case, 
Denkewalter v. Denkewalter, case No. 04 DR 0638 in the Medina County Domestic 
Relations Court.  Respondent Kovack, the only judge in that court, recused herself 
from the case.  Respondent Carol J. Dezso, a Summit County Domestic Relations 
Court judge, was assigned by the chief justice to hear the Denkewalter case.  
Respondent Stephan B. Collins is a magistrate in the Summit County Domestic 
Relations Court. 
{¶ 5} In October 2007, Judge Kovack recused herself to avoid the 
appearance of impropriety.  The reason for the recusal was that the defendant in the 
divorce case is an attorney who practices in the Medina County Domestic Relations 
Court.  Judge Dezso was assigned by the chief justice on December 6 of that year. 
{¶ 6} In July 2009, Judge Kovack issued an order assigning Deborah S. 
Matz, a magistrate of the Summit County Domestic Relations Court, to the case.  
Matz heard several motions and issued decisions on those motions.  Then in January 
January Term, 2016 
 
3
2014, Judge Kovack assigned Collins—also a magistrate of the Summit County 
court—to hear the case.  Magistrate Collins also heard several motions and issued 
decisions. 
{¶ 7} Moir objected to Judge Dezso that Judge Kovack does not have the 
authority to assign or refer matters to magistrates and that only Judge Dezso has 
authority to preside over matters in that case.  All motions to that effect, Moir 
asserts, have been dismissed or ignored. 
{¶ 8} An appeal arising from the divorce case was pending in the Ninth 
District Court of Appeals when this case was filed.  The court of appeals issued its 
opinion on August 10, 2015.  Denkewalter v. Denkewalter, 9th Dist. Medina No. 
13CA0082-M, 2015-Ohio-3171. While the opinion addressed whether the 
magistrates were properly appointed, it did not address Judge Kovack’s actions.  
Instead, the court of appeals considered Moir’s arguments regarding the assignment 
of magistrates by Judge Dezso herself and the signing of an order by a different, 
unassigned Summit County judge.  First, the court of appeals held that because it 
was granting her the relief she requested by reversing the trial court’s judgment on 
the motion at issue, Moir’s argument about the unassigned judge signing the order 
was moot.  Id. at ¶ 14.  With respect to the participation of an improperly assigned 
magistrate, the court found that Moir had failed to object on this issue and had 
therefore forfeited that argument.  Id.  The court concluded that any actions taken 
by improperly appointed or unassigned judicial personnel are voidable, but not void 
as argued by Moir.  Id. at ¶ 18.  The cause was remanded to the domestic relations 
court for further proceedings. 
{¶ 9} Moir requests a peremptory writ ordering respondents to cease efforts 
to assign or refer any person other than Judge Dezso to hear matters in Denkewalter. 
{¶ 10} Judge Kovack filed a motion to dismiss, as did the Summit County 
respondents.  Moir responded and moved to strike both motions on various grounds.  
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
In addition, the defendant in the divorce case filed a motion for leave to intervene 
and file an amicus brief instanter. 
{¶ 11} Both motions to dismiss were denied, and we ordered respondents 
to file answers within 21 days, which they did. 
Analysis: 
 
Motion to strike 
{¶ 12} On December 15, 2014, Moir moved to strike the Summit County 
motion to dismiss on the basis that it was untimely filed.  The motion to strike is 
now moot.  This court denied the motions to dismiss on June 3, 2015.  State ex rel. 
Moir v. Kovack, 142 Ohio St.3d 1474, 2015-Ohio-2104, 31 N.E.3d 653.  Even if 
Moir’s motion were not moot, it is without merit.  Despite Moir’s assertions, this 
court never ordered respondents to file a motion to dismiss and never set a filing 
deadline for such a motion.  So the motions did not ‘fail[] to follow [a] court order” 
as Moir contends.  In an original action, a motion to dismiss in lieu of an answer 
must be filed within 21 days of the service of the complaint.  S.Ct.Prac.R. 12.04(A).  
Both motions to dismiss in this case were timely filed under that rule. 
{¶ 13} The motion to strike is denied. 
 
Motion for leave to intervene and file amicus brief 
{¶ 14} The defendant in the underlying divorce case has filed a motion to 
intervene and to file an amicus brief instanter.  The proposed amicus brief mainly 
deals with factual details of the underlying case.  Nevertheless, as the defendant 
below has a stake in who hears his case, we grant his motion to intervene as a 
respondent and accept his brief. 
Prohibition: 
{¶ 15} To be entitled to the requested writ of prohibition, Moir must 
establish that (1) the respondents are about to or have exercised judicial power, (2) 
the exercise of that power is unauthorized by law, and (3) denying the writ would 
result in injury for which no other adequate remedy exists in the ordinary course of 
January Term, 2016 
 
5
law.  State ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 
181, ¶ 18; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 
2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12.  If the lack of jurisdiction is “patent and 
unambiguous,” Moir need not show the absence of an adequate remedy at law.  
Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Oil & Gas Comm., 135 Ohio St.3d 204, 2013-
Ohio-224, 985 N.E.2d 480, ¶ 11. 
{¶ 16} Here, the acts complained of are the assignments by Judge Kovack 
of Magistrates Collins and Matz to the Denkewalter case, and the subsequent and 
potential future acts of anyone other than Judge Dezso in presiding over and 
deciding various motions in the case.  In fact, Moir seeks to prohibit not only Judge 
Kovack from assigning a magistrate to hear her case, but also to bar even Judge 
Dezso from doing so.  Moir argues that only Judge Dezso herself can act in any 
way in her divorce case. 
{¶ 17} A judge’s act of assigning magistrates and the magistrates’ actions 
in deciding motions are undoubtedly acts of judicial power.  Moir’s request for 
relief is directed solely to the potential future acts of assignment or referral.  The 
question therefore is limited to whether such future acts by Judge Kovack or Judge 
Dezso would be lawful and whether Moir has an adequate remedy in the ordinary 
course of the law.  And if either judge “patently and unambiguously” lacks 
jurisdiction to assign or refer, the availability of an adequate remedy is irrelevant. 
{¶ 18} Judge Kovack and Judge Dezso both argue that Moir has an adequate 
remedy at law by way of appeal and that an appeal was in fact pending in the Ninth 
District. 
{¶ 19} This argument has merit.  Moir has alternate remedies at law by way 
of appeal, and indeed, the question of the legitimacy of actions by an improperly 
assigned magistrate was considered by the Ninth District Court of Appeals.  
Because she has a remedy by way of appeal, Moir may obtain a writ against both 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
6
judges only if she demonstrates that their jurisdiction to assign magistrates in the 
underlying divorce case is patently and unambiguously lacking. 
{¶ 20} As discussed above, the Ninth District ultimately rejected Moir’s 
arguments. As to the validity of the judgment rendered by the magistrate, the Ninth 
District held that any possible errors in the assignment of judicial personnel would 
render the judgment voidable, not void. 
{¶ 21} Whether the actions by a magistrate appointed by either Judge Dezso 
or by Judge Kovack after her recusal were void or voidable and whether Moir 
waived her objections are not issues before this court in this case.  Moir is not asking 
the court to correct those past actions. She is asking for a peremptory writ “ordering 
Respondents * * * to cease efforts [to] assign or refer any jurist other than the Judge 
assigned by the Chief Justice” and “to prevent * * * Dezso * * * from referring any 
matters * * * to any other jurists but herself.”  Thus, Moir is seeking future relief 
from future assignments or referrals by anyone―or to anyone―other than Judge 
Dezso. 
{¶ 22} Judge Kovack asserts in her answer that as administrative judge of 
the domestic relations court, she has authority to issue ministerial and 
administrative orders, including those complained of by Moir.  She claims that such 
orders have no bearing on the merits of the case and are unaffected by her recusal.  
She further claims that she is not about to act in any manner not authorized by law, 
which, given her stated belief that she has some authority to act in the case, does 
not equate to a commitment not to act. 
{¶ 23} If she acts to assign a magistrate for Judge Dezso, Judge Kovack 
would indeed be “exercis[ing] control over the administration, docket, and calendar 
of” the domestic relations division for which she is responsible.  Sup.R. 4.01(A).  
Civ.R. 53(A) permits a court of record to appoint one or more magistrates to 
exercise various adjudicatory functions.  Judge Kovack was acting as 
January Term, 2016 
 
7
administrative judge when assigning magistrates for Judge Dezso and not as the 
judge presiding over the merits of the Denkewalter case. 
{¶ 24} However, Judge Kovack recused herself specifically because she 
wished to avoid the appearance of impropriety, which might arise due to the fact 
that one of the parties is an attorney who practices in her court. 
{¶ 25} Therefore, Judge Kovack lacks jurisdiction to assign a magistrate to 
the underlying case, and her lack of jurisdiction is patent and unambiguous.  The 
chief justice assigned Judge Dezso of the Summit County Domestic Relations 
Court to avoid any appearance of impropriety, and Judge Dezso has exclusive 
jurisdiction to hear the case. 
{¶ 26} Because Judge Kovack lacks jurisdiction to act, we issue a 
peremptory writ of prohibition as to her only, ordering her to refrain from taking 
any action in Denkewalter, including administrative actions. 
{¶ 27} But no writ will issue against Judge Dezso or the other respondents.  
If Judge Dezso wishes to appoint a magistrate to assist her in the Denkewalter case, 
she has authority to do so under Civ.R. 53(A).  As to the remaining respondents, 
they do not claim any intention to act or indeed any authority to act.  They were 
improperly named as respondents and the complaint is dismissed as to them.  See 
State ex rel. Johnson v. Jensen, 140 Ohio St.3d 65, 2014-Ohio-3159, 14 N.E.3d 
1039. 
Conclusion 
{¶ 28} Judge Kovack patently and unambiguously lacks jurisdiction to act 
in Denkewalter v. Denkewalter, Medina County Domestic Relations Court No. 04 
DR 0638, including the appointment of magistrates. Therefore, her prior 
appointment of magistrates in that case is vacated, and we issue a writ of prohibition 
ordering her to refrain from such appointments or from any other action in that case. 
Writ granted in part 
and denied in part. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
8
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LANZINGER, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 
O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, and FRENCH, JJ., concur in judgment only. 
_________________ 
 
The Lukacs Law Firm, L.L.C., and Cheryl A. Lukacs, for relator. 
 
Sherri Bevan Walsh, Summit County Prosecuting Attorney, and John F. 
Galonski, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Summit County respondents. 
Dean Holman, Medina County Prosecuting Attorney, and Tom J. Karris, 
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Medina County respondents. 
_________________