Case Title: State ex rel. Fontanella v. Kontos

Citation: 2008-Ohio-1431

Docket Number: 20072102

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2008-04-02T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as State ex rel. Fontanella v. Kontos, 117 Ohio St.3d 514, 2008-Ohio-1431.] 
 
 
THE STATE EX REL. FONTANELLA,  
APPELLANT, v. KONTOS, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Fontanella v. Kontos,  
117 Ohio St.3d 514, 2008-Ohio-1431.] 
Mandamus — Procedendo — Writs sought to compel common pleas court judge 
to rule on motions in action for breach of contract — Court of appeals’ 
denial of writs affirmed. 
(No. 2007-2102 ─ Submitted March 26, 2008 ─ Decided April 2, 2008.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Trumbull County, 
No. 2007-T-055, 2007-Ohio-5213. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing a petition for writs of 
procedendo and mandamus to compel a common pleas court judge to rule on 
various motions in an action for a breach of contract.  Because the judge has ruled 
on these motions, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. 
{¶ 2} Appellee, Trumbull County Common Pleas Court Judge Peter J. 
Kontos, presided over an action for breach of contract filed by appellant, Dominic 
F. Fontanella.  From 2000 through 2007, Fontanella filed various motions in the 
case, including a motion for default judgment.  In September 2004, Judge Kontos 
entered summary judgment in favor of the defendant in the case.  In April 2007, 
Judge Kontos denied all of Fontanella’s motions that were still pending as 
“pointless, frivolous, and otherwise moot.” 
{¶ 3} Fontanella subsequently filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for 
Trumbull County for a writ of procedendo or a writ of mandamus to compel 
Judge Kontos to rule on his motions in the case.  Judge Kontos filed a motion to 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
dismiss the petition because he had already ruled on the motions.  He attached a 
copy of his April 2007 judgment.  The court of appeals granted the judge’s 
motion and dismissed the petition. 
{¶ 4} This cause is now before the court upon Fontanella’s appeal as of 
right. 
{¶ 5} The court of appeals correctly dismissed Fontanella’s petition. 
{¶ 6} “ ‘Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the performance 
of a duty that has already been performed.’ ”  State ex rel. Howard v. Doneghy, 
102 Ohio St.3d 355, 2004-Ohio-3207, 810 N.E.2d 958, ¶ 6, quoting State ex rel. 
Kreps v. Christiansen (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 313, 318, 725 N.E.2d 663.  Judge 
Kontos has already ruled on Fontanella’s motions through his entries in 2004 and 
2007.  See State ex rel. Forsyth v. Brigner (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 299, 300, 714 
N.E.2d 922 (mandamus will not lie to compel judge to rule on pretrial motion that 
was presumptively overruled when judgment was entered). 
{¶ 7} Moreover, insofar as Fontanella claims that Judge Kontos erred in 
denying his motion for default judgment in the underlying case, “neither 
mandamus nor procedendo can be used to control judicial discretion, even if * * * 
that discretion is abused.”  State ex rel. Tenace v. Court of Claims (2002), 94 
Ohio St.3d 319, 322, 762 N.E.2d 1009. 
{¶ 8} Finally, “neither a writ of procedendo nor a writ of mandamus will 
issue if an adequate remedy exists in the ordinary course of law.”  State ex rel. 
Reynolds v. Basinger, 99 Ohio St.3d 303, 2003-Ohio-3631, 791 N.E.2d 459, ¶ 8.  
Fontanella had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law by way of 
appeal from the judge’s rulings to raise his claims of error. 
{¶ 9} Based on the foregoing, because Fontanella’s claims for 
extraordinary relief in procedendo and mandamus lacked merit, we affirm the 
judgment of the court of appeals dismissing his petition.  See generally State ex 
January Term, 2008 
3 
rel. Non-Employees of Chateau Estates Resident Assn. v. Kessler, 107 Ohio St.3d 
197, 2005-Ohio-6182, 837 N.E.2d 778. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Dominic F. Fontanella, pro se. 
 
Dennis Watkins, Trumbull County Prosecuting Attorney, and LuWayne 
Annos, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
______________________