Title: State ex rel. Bell v. Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Bell v. Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs., Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-527.] 
 
 
 
 
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. 2011-OHIO-527 
THE STATE EX REL. BELL, APPELLANT, v. MADISON COUNTY BOARD OF 
COMMISSIONERS ET AL., APPELLEES. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Bell v. Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs.,  
Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-527.] 
Mandamus — Petition seeking order compelling county board of commissioners 
to comply with R.C. 163.01 to 163.02 in taking of real property rights and 
to comply with consent agreement — Adequate remedies at law exist in 
civil actions — Writ denied. 
(No. 2010-1525 — Submitted February 2, 2011 — Decided February 9, 2011.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Madison County, No. CA2010-04-010. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 
petition of appellant, Greg A. Bell, for a writ of mandamus ordering appellee 
Madison County Board of Commissioners to comply with R.C. 163.01 to 163.02 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
to provide him with due process in the taking of his real property rights and to 
comply with a consent agreement. 
{¶ 2} “Mandamus will not issue if there is a plain and adequate remedy 
in the ordinary course of law.”  State ex rel. McClaran v. Ontario, 119 Ohio St.3d 
105, 2008-Ohio-3867, 892 N.E.2d 440, ¶ 15; R.C. 2731.05.  Bell had adequate 
remedies at law by way of the civil actions and appeals he has already pursued.  
See, e.g., Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. Bell, Madison C.P. No. 2003CV-02-
071, affirmed in Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. Bell, Madison App. No. 
CA2005-09-036, 2007-Ohio-1373, appeal not accepted, Madison Cty. Bd. of 
Commrs. v. Bell, 114 Ohio St.3d 1512, 2007-Ohio-4285, 872 N.E.2d 953; Bell v. 
Nichols, Franklin C.P. No. 2008-CVH04-6427, affirmed in Bell v. Nichols, 
Franklin App. No. 09AP-438, 2009-Ohio-4851. 
{¶ 3} Moreover, the mere fact that Bell has already unsuccessfully 
invoked some of these alternate remedies does not thereby entitle him to the 
requested extraordinary relief in mandamus.  See State ex rel. Agosto v. Cuyahoga 
Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 119 Ohio St.3d 366, 2008-Ohio-4607, 894 N.E.2d 
314, ¶ 12; State ex rel. Dreamer v. Mason, 115 Ohio St.3d 190, 2007-Ohio-4789, 
874 N.E.2d 510, ¶ 13. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
Phillip Wayne Cramer, for appellant. 
Onda, LaBuhn, Rankin & Boggs Co., L.P.A., and Timothy S. Rankin, for 
appellee Madison County Board of Commissioners. 
______________________