Title: Plaintiff v. Defendant

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. Hazel v. Bender, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-2112.] 
 
 
 
 
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-2112 
THE STATE EX REL. HAZEL, APPELLANT, v. BENDER, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Hazel v. Bender,  
Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-2112.] 
Appeal from dismissal of a petition for a writ of procedendo — Adequate remedy 
at law — Successive appellate reviews — Judgment affirmed. 
(No. 2009-2309 — Submitted May 12, 2010 — Decided May 19, 2010.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, 
No. 09AP-288, 2009-Ohio-6326. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals denying the claim 
of appellant, Corey Hazel, for a writ of procedendo to compel appellee, Franklin 
County Court of Common Pleas Judge John F. Bender, to enter judgment on 
Hazel’s September 4, 2007 petition for postconviction relief.  Hazel had an 
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law by appeal to raise his claim, and he 
raised it in State v. Hazel, Franklin App. Nos. 08AP-789 and 08AP-790, 2009-
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
Ohio-880, at ¶ 8.  Procedendo does not lie when the relator has an adequate 
remedy in the ordinary course of the law.  State ex rel. New Concept Hous., Inc. v. 
Metz, 123 Ohio St.3d 457, 2009-Ohio-5862, 917 N.E.2d 796, ¶ 2.  And 
“[e]xtraordinary writs may not be used to gain successive appellate reviews of the 
same issue.”  State ex rel. Woods v. Oak Hill Community Med. Ctr. (2001), 91 
Ohio St.3d 459, 462, 746 N.E.2d 1108.1 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
BROWN, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Corey Hazel, pro se. 
 
Ron O’Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Paul Thies, 
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
______________________ 
                                                 
1.  We deny Hazel’s motion to strike Judge Bender’s brief.